Has anyone noticed that non-believers won't take the CC seriously because of the scandals of the past and present?

[O.S.Luke]

There are always going to be extremes and certifiable “nuts”. They are usually the exception rather than the rule.

The fact of the matter is that there are a whole lot more folks who are not churched in any Christian tradition. Secularism is the enemy; Catholics and Protestants had better realize that they are friends in the battle rather than enemies.

39 John said to him, “Teacher, we saw someone driving out demons in your name, and we tried to prevent him because he does not follow us.”

40 Jesus replied, "Do not prevent him. There is no one who performs a mighty deed in my name who can at the same time speak ill of me.

41 For whoever is not against us is for us. - NAB

 

[VociMike]

There are always going to be extremes and certifiable “nuts”. They are usually the exception rather than the rule.

Yep, no disagreement there.

 

[Tantum_ergo]

Originally Posted by O.S. Luke
There are always going to be extremes and certifiable “nuts”. They are usually the exception rather than the rule.

Originally Posted by VociMike
Yep, no disagreement there.

And yet. . .those who are fiercest against the Catholic Church insist that in all those ‘horrors’ perpetrated ‘by the Church’ that the ‘extremes and nuts’ are the rule, **not **the exception.

ALL crusaders were thieves and murderers.
ALL priests are pedophiles.
ALL the missionaries who served the New World were genocidal monsters of the ‘convert or die’ persuasion.
ALL the nuns were either brainwashed, mentally defective, and either having relations with the priests and burying the children conceived and born in dungeons, or else were so ‘repressed’ that they got their ‘jollies’ from beating children, the elderly, etc.
ALL ‘modern’ Catholics are either brainwashed, mentally defective, only ‘pretend’ to be Christians, are actively persecuting 'real Christians, are hypocrites who don’t follow what they preach, are the ‘dupes’ of the Pope who is going to take over the world and kill the ‘real’ Christians, are joyless, spineless, idolaters, etc.

Never mind that of the last list, just about everything is ‘contradictary’ and that a person cannot simultaneously be both a dupe AND a schemer, too ‘stupid’ to know better AND so clever to be able to ‘deceive’ millions, etc.

 

[kenmd]

addressing “JonNC”:
‘Gottle of Geer’ expressed the same sentiment that I hold, and addressed the relevent issues.

Addressing “JoeyWarren”
My point is certainly not that sexual misconduct is limited in scope to the Catholic church, anything but. The abuses in Christendom unfortunately gives atheists another excuse to criticise believers.

 

[JoeyWarren]

addressing “JonNC”:
‘Gottle of Geer’ expressed the same sentiment that I hold, and addressed the relevent issues.

Addressing “JoeyWarren”
My point is certainly not that sexual misconduct is limited in scope to the Catholic church, anything but. The abuses in Christendom unfortunately gives atheists another excuse to criticise believers.

The point being is that when a RC Priest is accused of Sexual Abuse, it is on the National Airwaves and the Front Pages. When a Baptist is accused of Sexual Abuse, it hardly ever reaches the National Airwaves and most of the time it is regulated to the back pages. Now ask yourself WHY?

 

[teancum79]

foxnews.com/story/0,2933,354201,00.html

Yet person who happens to be catholic making a bad choice. Which can be abused to make nearly a billion people look bad.

I agree that our media tends to go after some groups way more than others.

The question is how do you put it in context without being accused of a cover up?

 

[JoeyWarren]

foxnews.com/story/0,2933,354201,00.html

Yet person who happens to be catholic making a bad choice. Which can be abused to make nearly a billion people look bad.

I agree that our media tends to go after some groups way more than others.

The question is how do you put it in context without being accused of a cover up?

Like this I guess

A bad Catholic is not a Church problem. It is a personal problem. Just as a bad Protestant is not a Protestant problem. It is a personal problem. Just as a Fundy LDS is not a Church problem but a personal problem.

 

[Gottle_of_Geer]

The test by fruits leaves the Catholic Church in the same positions all of the rest of us (oddly enough); that we all sin and fall short of the glory of God., that we must turn to the grace of God through our Lord and Savior for forgiveness, as it is clear that none of us are capable of living up to the high vault that the law sets before us. Our works always fail us. As for holding the CC to an even higher standard, I will leave that to you and other Catholics, as the log in my eye is clearly equal to yours.

Jon

**Then maybe it shouldn’t apply that test. As it does, it cannot complain when its own test is applied to it. That is not a gracious way of thinking, but it is the CC’s way of thinking - & it is not unfair to expect the CC to live up to its own standards, because it is for ever boasting about how wonderful it is, because of all the high privileges it claims. **​

---

**I think it’s extremely unfair to try to exonerate the CC, but there’s no point in pursuing the matter. By all means PM me if you wish. **

 

[Gottle_of_Geer]

Especially the paedophilia/sex abuse scandals. When the Church has a public opinion on something, such as a morality topic, people will say that the CC are hypocritical and “irrelevant”, because of their crimes/wrongdoings of the past.

For example, the CC has complained about the languange on Gordon Ramsey’s shows: news.com.au/entertainment/comments/0,26700,23648304-10229,00.html, and there are so many people who dismiss the Church because they are complaining about language, yet they protected pedophiles etc. Read some of the public comments. It hurt me to read them. People are disgusted with the Church and with religion.

Will the CC ever lose the this reputation in secular societies? Should the CC back off from the public spotlight, or should it become even more public?

What would you say in this scenario:
Non-Christian: How dare your Church tell me and the rest of society what to do when some of the worst crimes were committed by your church, even in recent times. Why should I listen to the what the Church says?

You/me: (Then what should a Catholic say?)

**Does it deserve to lose that reputation ? These are not “minor” peccadilloes, like stealing apples - these are major offences against the person, in several countries, over a protracted period of time, committed by persons in positions of very great trust. Many of these offences were known to the superiors of those who committed them - yet those who committed them were not denounced to the police, but were protected, & in many cases re-offended not once, but repeatedly. And that is putting matters mildly. The death penalty was made for people who do such things. In the past, they would have been burned alive **​

**The Church is not above the moral law - it cannot condemn abortion, yet expect not to be condemned for its own behaviour. Quite apart from trivia like morals, the damage this has done to the Church’s reputation as a (supposedly) Christian institution is incalculable. An individual guilty of paedophilia would not be allowed to forget what he had done - why should the Church be spared ? A little humility from those who take it on themselves to lecture the rest of society on morality would not be out of place. **

**I don’t think the Church will be allowed to forget this business for many, many generations to come; ****should that be so, it will not be unjust. **

 

[ralphinal]

Does it deserve to lose that reputation ? These are not “minor” peccadilloes, like stealing apples - these are major offences against the person, in several countries, over a protracted period of time, committed by persons in positions of very great trust. Many of these offences were known to the superiors of those who committed them - yet those who committed them were not denounced to the police, but were protected, & in many cases re-offended not once, but repeatedly. And that is putting matters mildly. The death penalty was made for people who do such things. In the past, they would have been burned alive ​

**The Church is not above the moral law - it cannot condemn abortion, yet expect not to be condemned for its own behaviour. Quite apart from trivia like morals, the damage this has done to the Church’s reputation as a (supposedly) Christian institution is incalculable. An individual guilty of paedophilia would not be allowed to forget what he had done - why should the Church be spared ? A little humility from those who take it on themselves to lecture the rest of society on morality would not be out of place. **

**I don’t think the Church will be allowed to forget this business for many, many generations to come; ****should that be so, it will not be unjust. **

I hate to jump in, but please allow me. Did the Church TELL people to hide the crimes? Was it encouraged by the Canon Law? Was it a mandate by the pope? Nope. It was bad judgement based on bad science and bad insight of the human concept. It was not the Church teaching, nor was it Canon Law, and it was not on order of the Pope. Simply put, people failed the Church. The Church did not fail the people.

 

[emeraldcoast]

I hate to jump in, but please allow me. Did the Church TELL people to hide the crimes? Was it encouraged by the Canon Law? Was it a mandate by the pope? Nope. It was bad judgement based on bad science and bad insight of the human concept. It was not the Church teaching, nor was it Canon Law, and it was not on order of the Pope. Simply put, people failed the Church. The Church did not fail the people.

Does anyone know about this document, “On the Manner of Proceeding in Cases of Solicitation” ?

bishop-accountability.org/news5/2003_07_29_Shaw_VaticanDocument.htm

bishop-accountability.org/resources/resource-files/churchdocs/CrimenEnglish.pdf

 

[ralphinal]

Does anyone know about this document, “On the Manner of Proceeding in Cases of Solicitation” ?

bishop-accountability.org/news5/2003_07_29_Shaw_VaticanDocument.htm

bishop-accountability.org/resources/resource-files/churchdocs/CrimenEnglish.pdf

I read through it. Two points. First, it deals with issues from the sacrament of confession. There is a seal over that sacrament that cannot be broken. Care must be taken that secrecy is preserved for the penitent (not the guilty, although they two are prosumed innocent until proven otherwise). Second, the penalties given are removal of preistly faculties for some time and even defrocking. That was not followed at all.

I do not see it as an order not to deal with it or to simply shift them around. In fact, at some point, this would allow bishops to kick them out of the church

 

[kesa82]

I thought that it was necessary for Christ to live as a man, and get nailed to a cross, because otherwise heaven would be a very empty place.

Is there such a thing as a credible human authority? Even my sweetheart Joan of Arc seems to have been slightly less than perfect. To hear people talk though, the opposite was the case ; Christ went to Golgatha to rescue a tiny minority of goats, since the vast majority is so perfect, because he was such a bleeding heart bimbo.

Oh no, I really must be damned then.

 

[kesa82]

**​

** An individual guilty of paedophilia would not be allowed to forget what he had done - why should the Church be spared ? ****

Everybody is going to hate me for saying this. The mania for stamping out crime has become extreme. Doing away with the concept of paying your debt to society, permanent criminal records ( teenagers will now be blacklisted for shoplifting until they die. ) is gonna be more dangerous than the hydrogen bomb.
I’m irrational? Unrealistic? It is still true.

 

[Gottle_of_Geer]

I hate to jump in, but please allow me. Did the Church TELL people to hide the crimes?

**The Church did the hiding. What’s a bishop who inflicts a serial paedophile on different parishes, if not a hider of such things ? Not a layman. Or do priests transfer themselves ? Of course not. What is not informing a parish of the proclivities & past actions of their new parish priest, if it is not hiding from the parishioners facts they need to know in order to keep their offspring unmolested ? **​

Was it encouraged by the Canon Law? Was it a mandate by the pope? Nope. It was bad judgement based on bad science and bad insight of the human concept. It was not the Church teaching, nor was it Canon Law, and it was not on order of the Pope.

Someone who finds a man in need & leaves him to die is as truly responsible for his death as though he had murdered him. It’s called neglect. The CC does not have to command priests to abuse people - it can be responsible for the lives that are ruined by such actions, by its neglect.

Simply put, people failed the Church. The Church did not fail the people.

"The Church did not fail the people" ??? That sort of “excuse” only goes to show how utterly unworthy of trust the Church is. That kind of pitiful evasion is precisely what has made the Church’s name synonymous not with goodness, kindness, honesty, but with lies, prevarication, deceit, obstructiveness, shamelessness, arrogance, & other vices. ​

 

[HashemEchad]

I thought that it was necessary for Christ to live as a man, and get nailed to a cross, because otherwise heaven would be a very empty place.

Is there such a thing as a credible human authority? Even my sweetheart Joan of Arc seems to have been slightly less than perfect. To hear people talk though, the opposite was the case ; Christ went to Golgatha to rescue a tiny minority of goats, since the vast majority is so perfect, because he was such a bleeding heart bimbo.

Oh no, I really must be damned then.

What makes Joan of Arc “less than perfect” in your eyes?

 

[kalt]

Been a Protestant all my life. I’ve never heard anyone fear the Pope or fear that the Catholic Church is going to “take over.”

What a load.

This means only that you don’t know the people I know.

Though your story is different, I won’t call it “a load”.

 

[ufamtobie]

Especially the paedophilia/sex abuse scandals. When the Church has a public opinion on something, such as a morality topic, people will say that the CC are hypocritical and “irrelevant”, because of their crimes/wrongdoings of the past.

For example, the CC has complained about the languange on Gordon Ramsey’s shows: news.com.au/entertainment/comments/0,26700,23648304-10229,00.html, and there are so many people who dismiss the Church because they are complaining about language, yet they protected pedophiles etc. Read some of the public comments. It hurt me to read them. People are disgusted with the Church and with religion.

Will the CC ever lose the this reputation in secular societies? Should the CC back off from the public spotlight, or should it become even more public?

What would you say in this scenario:
Non-Christian: How dare your Church tell me and the rest of society what to do when some of the worst crimes were committed by your church, even in recent times. Why should I listen to the what the Church says?

You/me: (Then what should a Catholic say?)

Hi there MH84,

I am a practicing Roman Catholic. Now about the crimes commited in the Catholic Church, so very sad! However now we must remember that the church itself in infallable, the teachings of the church immaculate.

Now about these small handful of Catholic Priests who went astray may the Lord Have mercy on them.

There has been crimes commited in the Catholic Church from the begining. Look at Judas, he betrayed our Lord, he was one of the Aostles for crying out loud! Peter, denied our Lord 1.2.3 times and he became our first Pope, now is that funny How about Saul aka Paul, he was having people stoned to death for believing in Jesus Christ, the List goes on and on…

My point is, is that Jesus Christ Our Lord, Knew he was leaving his One True Catholic Church in the hands of sinful Men and again only a **small handful **of Priest have gone astray. Jesus,knew this would happen again, so does this now mean the Church is fallable because the errors of a few priests, NO!!! The Catholic Church in its Teachings are INFALLABLE though the Priest at times are fallable, The Church Never.

MH84, I don’t blush when they talk about my Catholic Chuch and niether should you. I stand tall with my faith I am blessed to be a Catholic.

If people don’t want to listen to the Church, oh well our Lord did give each of us his or hers own will. I pray for them to change. The Lords will be done.

Ufamtobie

 

[kalt]

Been a Protestant all my life. I’ve never heard anyone fear the Pope or fear that the Catholic Church is going to “take over.”

What a load.

Here’s an article you might be interested in.

findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1374/is_n5_v53/ai_13255809

 

[paarsurrey]

Thus, the teachings of the Church, or ‘what the Church says’ would be true whether or not the teachers (the clergy and we lay people) are ‘perfect’, ‘sinless’, etc. Personal ‘sin’ has no impact upon the Word of Christ.

Hi

The teachings of the Church are so different from the teachings of JesusYeshuaIssa. Unless the Church removes its differences with JesusYeshuaIssa; one cannot know right from the wrong.

Thanks