Catholics vs. TTA......Respectfully.....
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
28-02-2015, 08:51 PM
RE: Catholics vs. TTA......Respectfully.....
(28-02-2015 03:35 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
(28-02-2015 01:49 PM)PetrovPolak Wrote:  What does that have to do with anything? Do you even know what ecumenicism means?

I do. Apparently you don't IF the first Christians had enough of an ecumenical view to BE Jews, it means a hell of a lot, now doesn't it. Jesus was a Jew. He never renounced Judaism. You cult did that, but not for a LONG LONG time.

(28-02-2015 01:49 PM)PetrovPolak Wrote:  Once again, what does that have to do with the part you quoted?

If your church FORCES people to SAY they believe when they don't (no religious freedom) you think your stupid god doesn't know the difference ?

(28-02-2015 01:49 PM)PetrovPolak Wrote:  Well, obviously, as our religion is the right one. There's no relativism to be had when it comes to truth, you ingrate.

Not obviously at all, as many mich more highly educated scholars than you will ever be don't buy into your crap, and and it's not "our religion" as you are not a Catholic.

(28-02-2015 01:49 PM)PetrovPolak Wrote:  That's actually a common misconception, one that even some Catholic theologians make. A Council isn't automatically a Council just because it's called by the Pope. The First Council of Nicaea was called by the 'Roman Emperor', not the Pope, and yet, it's still considered valid.

The POINT is what ? Roman Emperors can call councils. You have not said EXACTLY what it was about the "calling" that was invalid, AND virtually ALL the bishops of the church you *claim* to be a member of thought it was valid, ad sat for years attending it. Again, you are no Catholic.

(28-02-2015 01:49 PM)PetrovPolak Wrote:  Blah, blah, fucking blah. More pig-headed horseshit, and unsupported, paragraph-long rhetorics, from one of the stupidest atheists I've met in a long time....and that's saying something.

Just as I thought. you have NO education in the subjects here, and are totally incapable of defending your ignorant positions.

(28-02-2015 01:49 PM)PetrovPolak Wrote:  It declared new doctrines throughout history in order to acknowledge already long-standing theological realities, however, it always maintained the same spirit, traditions, and basic teachings. It never deviated into the secularist, hyper-tolerant, 'nice' Church that it is today.

"New doctrines" (hahahaha) oh really. The church of "tradition and scripture" declares new doctrines. Hahahahaha

You are a bigoted ignorant self-righteous non-Catholic. You claim to be a member of the very organization you reject. Go get help.
It's funny. There are quite a few of your types. Rather ignorant "dilettantes" who have never really studied either Theology or the Bible, are really unable to defend your rantings, ("well, well, just go watch the video") and are obviously VERY VERY angry about the changes in your church, but don't seem to be able to do what has to be done. Leave it. You really are not a Catholic, but hang on the fringe, criticizing instead of having the balls to actually make a total break. You're wasting your life. You have only one. The soon you jettison the crap the RCC is, the better off you'll be.

Still waiting for 10 bishops who think Vatican II was not correctly called or valid. The fact is you would *find* a reason to reject anything you didn't like. You don't like the changes, and they bother you very very much, and you cannot get on with life. You're completely stuck. Stuck in the distant past.

Quote:I do. Apparently you don't IF the first Christians had enough of an ecumenical view to BE Jews, it means a hell of a lot, now doesn't it. Jesus was a Jew. He never renounced Judaism. You cult did that, but not for a LONG LONG time.

They were Jews because the New Covenant hadn't been fully put into place by Jesus. After his death, it was, therefore invalidating Judaism as a religion in its own right. Study theology instead of the backs of cereal boxes.

Quote:If your church FORCES people to SAY they believe when they don't (no religious freedom) you think your stupid god doesn't know the difference ?

Eh, as long as they don't apostatize, if they continue to actively search for truth, they'll find it.

Quote:Not obviously at all, as many mich more highly educated scholars than you will ever be don't buy into your crap, and and it's not "our religion" as you are not a Catholic.

Not educated in the right subjects to determine such a matter. I've never met an atheist who's known as much about theology as your standard Catholic theologian.
Also, who the fuck are you to determine who, and who isn't a Catholic, you degenerate?

Quote:Just as I thought. you have NO education in the subjects here, and are totally incapable of defending your ignorant positions.

Defending them from what? Two paragraphs of meaningless rhetoric and claptrap?

Quote:"New doctrines" (hahahaha) oh really. The church of "tradition and scripture" declares new doctrines.

They only acknowledge long-standing theological realities. So, no, they don't 'invent' anything new, like you're implying.

Quote:You are a bigoted ignorant self-righteous non-Catholic.

Well, I try.

Quote:You claim to be a member of the very organization you reject.

I reject the non-dogmatic, modernist Vatican 2, that contradicts previous teachings. Not the Church.

Quote:Go get help.

Go get shot in the face.

Quote:There are quite a few of your types. Rather ignorant "dilettantes" who have never really studied either Theology or the Bible, are really unable to defend your rantings,

I've provided my defenses multiple times, as well as a one hour video by Father Hesse providing detailed arguments, which you STILL have not even responded to in any way.

Quote:Leave it. You really are not a Catholic, but hang on the fringe, criticizing instead of having the balls to actually make a total break.

You might want to rethink that. If I leave the Church, I'm no longer bound by its moral teachings, therefore, the first thing I'll do if I leave it is find you, and beat you within an inch of your life.

Quote:Still waiting for 10 bishops who think Vatican II was not correctly called or valid.

Have you not heard of Archbishop Lefebvre, or the Society of Saint Pius X, he founded? What about Cardinal Burke, or Father Gregory Hesse, all of which I've listed before. Also, since you don't seem to understand what an appeal to majority fallacy is, here's a link: http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies...arity.html

Quote:The fact is you would *find* a reason to reject anything you didn't like.

Actually, any person not indoctrinated into the AtheistKult would see that you're the one trying to find a reason to reject everything I say, even if it's valid, and then covering it up with mindless rhetoric and ad-hominems. And on that note, I noticed you STILL haven't responded to anything Father Hesse said. Most likely because you can't.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-02-2015, 08:55 PM
RE: Catholics vs. TTA......Respectfully.....
(28-02-2015 05:38 PM)Kaepora Gaebora Wrote:  Every theist believes their religion is the right one because they know it's right because of scripture.

But they can't produce the objective and verifiable evidence for their God.

The Canon of the Bible, if textual analysis deems the various texts to be written in the time and place they would expected to be, and by the expected people, then that would pretty much prove the events of the Bible, and thus God, objectively.

P.S.: The "Hearsay" objection won't work, as the Bible is not a single writing by a single person, it is a "canon" of different writings, by different people, that all testify to the validity of the other writings that are valid within their own context, therefore they all attest to each other, and are thus, considered valid historical proof.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-02-2015, 08:55 PM
RE: Catholics vs. TTA......Respectfully.....
(26-02-2015 09:14 PM)PetrovPolak Wrote:  
(26-02-2015 08:32 PM)Chas Wrote:  That would make the number even larger than 16,489. Thumbsup

Of course, but it's all the priests, worldwide, over a large time period like that. Not to mention, it's still much lower than the general populace, and certainly nearly every other organization of this size. Hell the public school systems have numbers of abuse cases around three times that number in half the time, yet no one bats an eye.

I have written an article, parts of which put the extent of of Catholic priest pedophilia in context...

In more recent times, the American media has exposed priest offenders in nearly every state of the USA. In February 2004, the final reports of two surveys commissioned by the US bishops (one must give them credit for doing this) were released. These surveys were conducted by the John Jay College of Criminal Justice in New York (http://www.philvaz.com/apologetics/Pries...andal.htm) and by the National Review Board (http://old.usccb.org/nrb/nrbstudy/nrbreport.htm).

Both reports looked at the issue of youth sexual abuse among Catholic clergy in the USA since the 1950s.

The John Jay survey revealed that almost forty-five hundred clergy perpetrators had been reported by dioceses since 1950, 4.3 percent of those actively working as priests in the period, and that at least ten thousand known victims had made plausible allegations against priests. The authors made the point that these figures were almost certainly an underestimate, and that the church would face many more allegations in the years to come. Most victims were aged eleven to fourteen and eighty-one percent were boys. Seventy-six percent of the allegations made against priests had never been reported to law enforcement authorities.

The National Review Board report placed blame for the widespread scandals directly on the bishops’ negligence. One of its concluding recommendations was that
“Dioceses and orders should report all allegations of sexual abuse to the civil authorities, regardless of the circumstances, or the age or perceived credibility of the accuser” (pg.144.)

In 2009, in Ireland, a document known as the “Ryan report” (http://www.childabusecommission.com/rpt/) was released following a lengthy investigation of residential “Reformatory and Industrial Schools” operated by the Catholic Church and run mainly by the Christian Brothers. Justice Sean Ryan, a High Court judge, wrote the five-volume report based on nine years’ worth of interviews of victims, teachers, and others. It concluded that sexual abuse was “endemic” in the boys’ institutions and occasional in girls’ institutions, and that the entire system treated children more like prison inmates and slaves than people with legal rights and human potential. The sexual abuse of boys ranged from improper touching and fondling, to rape with violence. Perpetrators were able to operate undetected for long periods in these institutions. The Irish Times called the report

“a devastating indictment of Church and State authorities” and
“the map of an Irish hell” and reported that
“The sheer scale and longevity of the torment inflected on defenseless children—over eight hundred known abusers in over two hundred Catholic institutions during a period of thirty-five years—should alone make it clear that it was not accidental or opportunistic but systematic. Abuse was not a failure of the system. It was the system.”

Please read the above quote again.

The Murphy Report, (http://www.inis.gov.ie/en/JELR/Pages/PB09000504) headed by Judge Yvonne Murphy, is the result of a public inquiry commissioned by the Irish government to investigate the way in which the church dealt with allegations of sexual abuse of children by priests over the period 1975 to 2004 in the Catholic archdiocese of Dublin. The original brief was to report in eighteen months, but such was the volume of evidence and allegations concerning the abusive behavior of a sample batch of forty-six priests, who between them had allegedly abused thousands (!) of children, that time extensions had to be allowed. The commission made no attempt to establish whether sexual abuse actually took place, but examined the manner in which church and state authorities dealt with complaints. The 720-page report was publicly released in 2009. It stated that there was

“no doubt that clerical child sexual abuse was covered up” from January 1975 to May 2004.

The report recognized in no uncertain terms that the church itself, as controlled by the Vatican, had protected its priests and its assets:

“the Dublin Archdiocese’s pre-occupations in dealing with cases of child sexual abuse, at least until the mid-1990s, were the maintenance of secrecy, the avoidance of scandal, the protection of the reputation of the Church, and the preservation of its assets. All other considerations, including the welfare of children and justice for victims, were subordinated to these priorities. The Archdiocese did not implement its own canon law rules and did its best to avoid any application of the law of the State.”

The report noted that church leaders were well aware of the risk to children; as early as 1987, they took out insurance policies to cover the legal costs of future compensation claims.

Richard Sipe is a retired American Roman Catholic priest involved in full-time research and consultation about the sexual practices of Roman Catholic clergy (http://www.awrsipe.com, http://www.richardsipe.com/reports/sipe_...2005.htm). He’s authored six books on the subject, and has served as a respected consultant and expert witness in over two hundred cases involving sexual abuse of minors by Roman Catholic clergy. He claimed, in 2005, that

“Dioceses throughout the United States are now recording an average of 7 to 9 percent priest abusers of minors in their records.” (http://www.richardsipe.com/Dialogue/Dial...–23.html).

Surely the existence of any known child abusers still working as Catholic priests is unacceptable.

The statistics in countries in the rest of Europe, Canada, Australia, Asia, Africa and South America are not as well documented as yet, but there are similar horrific stories of abuse. The figures in the developed world will one day pale in comparison to the number in the developing world, such as in Latin America and Africa, where large-scale official investigations into Catholic priests’ behavior are yet to be conducted. (http://clericalabusewatch.blogspot.com.a...h-in.html, http://www.themediaproject.org/article/t...page=0,0). These countries (not prisons!) have been the dumping grounds for repeat priest offenders. Some of these priests live with women or men, but that’s no guarantee that the sex with children has stopped.

Whether the percentage of Catholic priests who abuse children and youths is much greater than for other Christian and non-Christian religious leaders (such as gurus, imams, ministers, pastors or rabbis) is unclear, as I can find no reliable data about these groups. It’s also difficult to find consistent reliable statistics as to what percentage of adult males in the general population sexually abuse children.

Up until recent years some Catholic priests have taken advantage of freer access to children than the average adult man, because they used to enjoy a position of authority and trust. Thus the number of abused children per offending priest is probably larger than for the average secular molester.

It’s possible that some Catholic priests probably chose their “calling,” or remained in the priesthood, because of the access it gave them to defenseless children. If you were a child molester, there was no better safe haven in which to hide than the priestly garb of the RC church.

The statistics from Ireland and the United States suggest that homosexual activity is grossly over-represented in the Catholic clergy as compared to the general population, because roughly 80% of the victims were boys, whereas victims of secular perpetrators are more likely to be girls. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_sexual_abuse). In fact estimates of the rate of homosexuality amongst Catholic American priests range from 23% to over 50% (http://www.latrompette.net/post/A-e005-R...f-God.htm, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/02/26...5550.html, http://americamagazine.org/issue/387/art...l-priest).

There’s nothing illegal or immoral about being homosexual, and no-one should jump to the erroneous conclusion that homosexuals are more likely to be pedophiles. Yet these figures may surprise some conservative Catholics, and it’s ironic that the Vatican so vehemently condemns homosexual behavior (http://dot429.com/articles/1305-vatican-...ex-unions) when their own ranks are so stacked with male homosexuals.

Is it possible that in the past, the Catholic priesthood, a brotherhood of men who couldn’t marry, yet were still respected members of society not suspected of being gay, was an attractive option for young homosexual men unwilling to publically admit their sexual inclination?

What made, and makes, so many of them abuse children is unclear. Perhaps they couldn’t unashamedly address their sexuality with other adults, and found themselves isolated. Children became an easy target because they were vulnerable, and explanations weren’t necessary.

Irrespective of the possible reasons, there are no excuses, and the statistics are shocking! Thousands of heartless, sadistic, Catholic priests gratified themselves at the expense of innocent children, usually pre pubescent boys who weren’t confident or physically strong enough to resist their advances.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Mark Fulton's post
28-02-2015, 09:01 PM
RE: Catholics vs. TTA......Respectfully.....
(28-02-2015 06:28 PM)Cathym112 Wrote:  Suscipe domine - your leader let you over here?

You all are a lot of crazy mother fuckers

Are you talking to PetrovPolak? Or me?

-

Excl On the ignore list: Taqiyya Mockingbird, Minimalist, DemonicLemon, GirlyMan, WhiskeyDebates, and EvolutionKills.
-
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-02-2015, 09:02 PM
RE: Catholics vs. TTA......Respectfully.....
(28-02-2015 08:55 PM)PetrovPolak Wrote:  
(28-02-2015 05:38 PM)Kaepora Gaebora Wrote:  Every theist believes their religion is the right one because they know it's right because of scripture.

But they can't produce the objective and verifiable evidence for their God.

The Canon of the Bible, if textual analysis deems the various texts to be written in the time and place they would expected to be, and by the expected people, then that would pretty much prove the events of the Bible, and thus God, objectively.

P.S.: The "Hearsay" objection won't work, as the Bible is not a single writing by a single person, it is a "canon" of different writings, by different people, that all testify to the validity of the other writings that are valid within their own context, therefore they all attest to each other, and are thus, considered valid historical proof.

"The Canon of the Bible, if textual analysis deems the various texts to be written in the time and place they would expected to be, and by the expected people, then that would pretty much prove the events of the Bible, and thus God, objectively."

Your grammar is poor, your sweeping statement illogical, and your knowledge about the origin of the Biblical texts is obviously severely lacking.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-02-2015, 09:05 PM
RE: Catholics vs. TTA......Respectfully.....
(28-02-2015 09:01 PM)LaramieHirsch Wrote:  
(28-02-2015 06:28 PM)Cathym112 Wrote:  Suscipe domine - your leader let you over here?

You all are a lot of crazy mother fuckers

Are you talking to PetrovPolak? Or me?

Almost certainly both of you and all the whack jobs at Suscipe Domine. Drinking Beverage

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
28-02-2015, 09:09 PM
RE: Catholics vs. TTA......Respectfully.....
(28-02-2015 05:04 PM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  
(28-02-2015 01:49 PM)PetrovPolak Wrote:  What does that have to do with anything? Do you even know what ecumenicism means?


Once again, what does that have to do with the part you quoted?



Well, obviously, as our religion is the right one. There's no relativism to be had when it comes to truth, you ingrate.

Besides, I doubt you'd be okay with a dictatorship existing instead of a democracy, so by that logic, you're only okay with a government enforcing rules as long as the government is in line with 'your' ideology, as well.


That's actually a common misconception, one that even some Catholic theologians make. A Council isn't automatically a Council just because it's called by the Pope. The First Council of Nicaea was called by the 'Roman Emperor', not the Pope, and yet, it's still considered valid.

You're also ignoring the procedures that take place while the Council is in progress, as well.


Blah, blah, fucking blah. More pig-headed horseshit, and unsupported, paragraph-long rhetorics, from one of the stupidest atheists I've met in a long time....and that's saying something.

It declared new doctrines throughout history in order to acknowledge already long-standing theological realities, however, it always maintained the same spirit, traditions, and basic teachings. It never deviated into the secularist, hyper-tolerant, 'nice' Church that it is today.

"however, it always maintained the same spirit, traditions, and basic teachings."

Huh? You must think in some sort of intellectual bubble that the historical facts have failed to penetrate.

Popes have behaved atrociously and made numerous immoral proclamations over the centuries. Their history could keep today’s reader appalled and entertained for weeks!
(http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/vatica...Contents). Christ’s vicar on earth has given license to warmongering, anti Semitism, the murder and torture of millions, incest, the stealing of people’s assets, the protection of criminals, misogyny, pedophilia, prostitution, the spread of Aids, homophobia, money laundering and much more.

You do realize that Tony Bushby is a fringe lunatic? Try listening to actual scholars and historians instead.

On that note though, yes, I admit that some Popes have behaved less than Popely, as in, horrible, but that doesn't contradict anything I said, as none of their deplorable behavior was declared as infallible dogma, and thus, the Church itself reaming uncorrupted.

I'm also going to have fun with a few of your statements.

Quote:anti Semitism

"Anti-Semitism" exists because the post 8th century Jews (Khazars that converted to a Jewish heresy that later became modern day Judaism) caused trouble, and did horrible things, everywhere they went. Don't give me that stupid, a-historical crap that everyone just hated them, and kicked them out, for no reason.

Quote:license to warmongering

I don't really care about warmongering, as long as the wars mongered are all significantly justified.

Quote:incest

Wat.

Quote:the murder and torture of millions

I'm guessing you, like all other people who hate the various Inquisitions, define "Murder" to means something that isn't murder.

Quote:homophobia

And?

Quote:the stealing of people’s assets, the protection of criminals, misogyny, pedophilia, prostitution, the spread of Aids

Okay, now you're just making shit up.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-02-2015, 09:09 PM
RE: Catholics vs. TTA......Respectfully.....
(28-02-2015 09:05 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(28-02-2015 09:01 PM)LaramieHirsch Wrote:  Are you talking to PetrovPolak? Or me?

Almost certainly both of you and all the whack jobs at Suscipe Domine. Drinking Beverage

Ah! Just making sure.

Suscipe Domine is not my leader. Just a note to you and all the "whack jobs" here at Thinking Atheist Forums. Drinking Beverage

-

Excl On the ignore list: Taqiyya Mockingbird, Minimalist, DemonicLemon, GirlyMan, WhiskeyDebates, and EvolutionKills.
-
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-02-2015, 09:10 PM (This post was last modified: 28-02-2015 09:20 PM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: Catholics vs. TTA......Respectfully.....
(28-02-2015 08:51 PM)PetrovPolak Wrote:  They were Jews because the New Covenant hadn't been fully put into place by Jesus. After his death, it was, therefore invalidating Judaism as a religion in its own right. Study theology instead of the backs of cereal boxes.

Hahahahaha. St John Chrysostom in his Christmas sermon in the year 400 (we have a copy of it), told HIS CONGREGATION to stop going to the synagogue. YOU obviously know NOTHING about History, or your own cult.

(28-02-2015 08:51 PM)PetrovPolak Wrote:  Not educated in the right subjects to determine such a matter. I've never met an atheist who's known as much about theology as your standard Catholic theologian.
Also, who the fuck are you to determine who, and who isn't a Catholic, you degenerate?

No one cares who or what you've met. Nice try ot deflection. YOU yourself have demonstrated you are no Catholic. So all you have is 1 crank bishop. I knew you had nothing.

(28-02-2015 08:51 PM)PetrovPolak Wrote:  I reject the non-dogmatic, modernist Vatican 2, that contradicts previous teachings. Not the Church.

THE CHURCH accept it as valid, therefore you do NOT accept the church as it stands today. You are no Catholic. You tell yourself you are. You are not.

(28-02-2015 08:51 PM)PetrovPolak Wrote:  Go get shot in the face.

How very Christian of you, you fucking hypocrite. You do the cause of atheism more good than anyone could imagine.

(28-02-2015 08:51 PM)PetrovPolak Wrote:  You might want to rethink that. If I leave the Church, I'm no longer bound by its moral teachings, therefore, the first thing I'll do if I leave it is find you, and beat you within an inch of your life.

THANK YOU. Threats are a bannable offense here. You will shortly be gone.
LMFAO. Like an old man like you could do anything to me. You fucking idiot. Tongue
I see Jebus and his Holy Fucking Catholic Church have made YOU into a very nice and charitable Christian gentleman. Facepalm
I suppose you will be going to communion tomorrow, you damn hypocrite. Weeping
BYE BYE
Rome excommunicated Lefebvre and the bishops he consecrated for many years. You are no Catholic in communion with Rome. YOU are a heretic, and you are obviously insane. Thanks for showing your true VERY SCARY self.

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
[+] 1 user Likes Bucky Ball's post
28-02-2015, 09:14 PM
RE: Catholics vs. TTA......Respectfully.....
(28-02-2015 09:09 PM)LaramieHirsch Wrote:  
(28-02-2015 09:05 PM)Chas Wrote:  Almost certainly both of you and all the whack jobs at Suscipe Domine. Drinking Beverage

Ah! Just making sure.

Suscipe Domine is not my leader. Just a note to you and all the "whack jobs" here at Thinking Atheist Forums. Drinking Beverage

Very amusing. You believe in things for which there is no evidence, rail against the hierarchy of your own claimed autocratic religion, and you call us whack jobs?

If you haven't been banned at Suscipe Domine, then you are toeing their absurd line.

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
Post Reply
Forum Jump: