The Catholic church did not give us the Bible

[NotTooSmart]

Like the name said NotTooSmart this person got this question fron some Penteecostal site and may be the dumbist question I have ever seen on this board and makes no sense at all. Non of the sexual abuse Priseit are not living at the time of the inquistion and the people from the sex Abuse are not living …So the right person has ask the right question NOT TOO SMART

Bill, you must really like making my list of favorite quotes of folks from the one true church who love to pay me…complements:

But you still have a way to go before you pass the one at the end which is my absolute favorite.

What a piece of work. You sure did choose your username well.

You make zero sense and you know it,

yet you just want to troll and (successfully) get a rise out of people for who knows what reason?

I don’t think you even care about those that were abused:

Yes, people like yourself are the gates of HELL who try to put down the Catholic Church and have been doing so for centuries and yet, “IT” still stands and yes Jesus Christ is correct WHEN HE SPEAKS ABOUT YOU, yes YOU, that YOU will not prevail over it!

Asking question as this I,l bet you got good mark in History and it looks like you not much at reading a new paper or are you just slow.

God help this person and keep him/her in your prays, The good abut this post is the person handle and boy it is right on the money NotTooSmart,say bye

Well your name is NotToo Smart and you think you are a hitwit and no one is argee with you.

Like the name said NotTooSmart this person got this question fron some Penteecostal site and may be the dumbist question I have ever seen on this board and makes no sense at all. Non of the sexual abuse Priseit are not living at the time of the inquistion and the people from the sex Abuse are not living …So the right person has ask the right question NOT TOO SMART

'll keep you in my prayers, you have a lot of demons.

 

[NotTooSmart]

This is an easy one, the Catholic Church did give us the Bible. Case closed.

And you said it, I believe it, and that settles it.

 

[Hisalone]

Oh, but it does.

I have gone back three paes and did not see your ? what is it?

 

[NotTooSmart]

This is an easy one, the Catholic Church did give us the Bible. Case closed.

You know what bothers me a little about this bragging…

It is not that men who were representing the Universal Church and acting on its behalf sorted through the early Christian writings and decided what should and should not be in Scripture. Historical facts are historical facts.

But such a statement ignores the role of God in all of this and almost seems to take praise and glory that should be given to God and gives it to the Universal Church.

God could have just provided a document with the table of contents.

But God being sovereign, instead graciously chose to include humans in what He was doing and graciously decided to use fallible human beings. It amazes me that in such an important task, God decided to use humans. I think praise and glory should go to God in this, not an attitude of “We did it”. Without God, it would not have gotten done.

 

[NotTooSmart]

Another thing that bothers me a little is when any denomination or group of Christians tries to rub the noses of other Christians into their past failures.

We all have enough common failures in our respective traditions that none of us has the right to be arrogant in this matter.

So I hope y’all understand that my intention in starting this thread was not to rub your noses in your past failures. After all we have Swaggart and Bakker.

It was more the inconsistencies that bothered me and also what sounded like unqualified bragging on this point,

 

[josie_L]

You know what bothers me a little about this bragging…

It is not that men who were representing the Universal Church and acting on its behalf sorted through the early Christian writings and decided what should and should not be in Scripture. Historical facts are historical facts.

But such a statement ignores the role of God in all of this and almost seems to take praise and glory that should be given to God and gives it to the Universal Church.

God could have just provided a document with the table of contents.

But God being sovereign, instead graciously chose to include humans in what He was doing and graciously decided to use fallible human beings. It amazes me that in such an important task, God decided to use humans. I think praise and glory should go to God in this, not an attitude of “We did it”. Without God, it would not have gotten done.

I’m not saying I had any part in assembling scripture so I can’t really brag, however, the Church did assemble the Bible, and it did so under the guidance of the Holy Spirit. The magisterium in communion with the bishop of Rome was the instrument that God used in order to create what we know of today as the Bible.

 

[latin_rite]

OK…then the Bible was given in spite of the Church and totally separately from the Church. I can live with that too.

Ok. I’ve been reading some of nottoosmart posts. And first let me say his name suits him/her to a tee.He/she seems very jealous of the Church. He/she knows they are taught a very limited and error filled version of the Bible/Christ teachings. I don’t know why he/she follows this error filled lite verson of Christ teachings. Maybe he/she knows their faith isn’t strong enough to follow the full strength version of Christianity. They can’t handle the fact that The Catholic Church did gives us the bible. And no matter what mistakes the followers of the Catholic faith has made since then, The facts still remain the facts. Jesus saw fit to entrust his words with us. And not one of his tupee wearing con artist demi gods that he worships.Which many are child molesters themselves who way of spreading the word of God includes duping old women out of their pensions. Yes we have problems with pedophile riest", but at least we are dealing with it. Unlike like the people like nottoosmart. Who point fingers and yell “Look at them” in a hope of drawing attention away from their own faults. So i’ll go to church this weekend and recieve the gift of the sacraments given to me by God. Maybe even give a little donation to help those who aren;t as lucky as me. And you nottoosmart" can go to your Brothel you call a church. Snear at others and give your con artist shaman your life savings for the miracle water that just happens to appear out of his kitchen tap.

 

[xixxvmcm85]

Finally 111 posts later, and all of the charitable compliments that I received in the previous post that I am so grateful for (they are so great that they have to go to my signature), I get a good response. Now there were a couple other good responses, but most were just complementing me for my brilliant name and other choice compliments.

However, it is getting very late and I am getting very tired so I can’t think this one through very well. I am going to bed.

But the rest of you keep your insu–mmm complements coming. They will make a “greaaaat” signature.

Thank you for the flattery NotTooSmart, I’m glad you enjoyed my post. I understand you might be busy, or the thought might have simply slipped your mind, but you still haven’t responded to what I wrote (assuming you so desire).

Here’s my post again:

NotTooSmart:

You seem to have a bit of trouble distinguishing between a coalition of people working together for a common goal and individual people’s behavior who just so happen to be members of said coalition. In this lies the problem of your misunderstanding and conflation of the sex scandals and canonization of scripture.

It is not the Catholic’s (nor the historian’s) position that any individual or individuals acting independently canonized the Bible, rather councils of the Church were convened in which the canon was established, then affirmed, and then reaffirmed. This is like a big board meeting. The results of such a board meeting indeed are “fair ground” for judging the organization. The fact that some members of the board, after the meeting go out to a bar, get sloshed, pick up some hookers and take them to a hotel is inconsequential to what one could say about the organization.

The only way one could compare the sex scandals of individual priests and even the cover up by individual bishops with the canonization of the Bible (or any other dogmatic decree which came forth from a council) would be if the Catholic Church convened another council or the Pope spoke ex cathedra claiming that sexual impropriety is morally OK or exemplary of the Church.

The Catholic Church has never issued such decrees, convened such councils, nor has the Pope ever utilized his Petrine prerogative to claim such. This is where your comparisons and “calls for consistency” fail.

You’re absolutely correct in stating that if the Church expects to be able to take ownership of the good that individuals do, she must also take ownership of the bad that individuals do. However, individual actions are not in question here with respect to canonization of scripture. It was never something wrought by an individual!

Does this finally make sense to you?

You seem to think well in analogies, so allow me to appeal to the governance of the United States:

If our congress were to meet, propose a law, vote on said law, and pass it, it would indeed be proper to say that the United States has done something. If some members of congress were then to leave chambers and commit a crime which that same congress had deemed illegal it would be improper to say that the United States has committed that crime. Likewise, if some members of congress after that session closed were to go out and do some charity, work in a soup kitchen, pick up stray kittens, hand out coats to the homeless, etc. it would be incorrect to say that the United States did those benevolent things precisely because “The United States” is defined by the coalition of representation.

The United States can “declare a war”, however the United States cannot “get drunk”. Likewise, the Catholic Church can (and did) “canonize the Bible”, however the Catholic cannot (and did not) “molest children”.

Does this make sense yet?

 

[NotTooSmart]

Ok. I’ve been reading some of nottoosmart posts. And first let me say his name suits him/her to a tee.He/she seems very jealous of the Church. He/she knows they are taught a very limited and error filled version of the Bible/Christ teachings. I don’t know why he/she follows this error filled lite verson of Christ teachings. Maybe he/she knows their faith isn’t strong enough to follow the full strength version of Christianity. They can’t handle the fact that The Catholic Church did gives us the bible. And no matter what mistakes the followers of the Catholic faith has made since then, The facts still remain the facts. Jesus saw fit to entrust his words with us. And not one of his tupee wearing con artist demi gods that he worships.Which many are child molesters themselves who way of spreading the word of God includes duping old women out of their pensions. Yes we have problems with pedophile riest", but at least we are dealing with it. Unlike like the people like nottoosmart. Who point fingers and yell “Look at them” in a hope of drawing attention away from their own faults. So i’ll go to church this weekend and recieve the gift of the sacraments given to me by God. Maybe even give a little donation to help those who aren;t as lucky as me. And you nottoosmart" can go to your Brothel you call a church. Snear at others and give your con artist shaman your life savings for the miracle water that just happens to appear out of his kitchen tap.

Thank you for the complement. You have greatly added to my running list of complements that I am collecting.

What a piece of work. You sure did choose your username well.

You make zero sense and you know it,

yet you just want to troll and (successfully) get a rise out of people for who knows what reason?

I don’t think you even care about those that were abused:

Yes, people like yourself are the gates of HELL who try to put down the Catholic Church and have been doing so for centuries and yet, “IT” still stands and yes Jesus Christ is correct WHEN HE SPEAKS ABOUT YOU, yes YOU, that YOU will not prevail over it!

Asking question as this I,l bet you got good mark in History and it looks like you not much at reading a new paper or are you just slow.

God help this person and keep him/her in your prays, The good abut this post is the person handle and boy it is right on the money NotTooSmart,say bye

Well your name is NotToo Smart and you think you are a hitwit and no one is argee with you.

Like the name said NotTooSmart this person got this question fron some Penteecostal site and may be the dumbist question I have ever seen on this board and makes no sense at all. Non of the sexual abuse Priseit are not living at the time of the inquistion and the people from the sex Abuse are not living …So the right person has ask the right question NOT TOO SMART

Ok. I’ve been reading some of nottoosmart posts. And first let me say his name suits him/her to a tee.He/she seems very jealous of the Church.

Yes we have problems with pedophile riest", but at least we are dealing with it. Unlike like the people like nottoosmart. Who point fingers and yell “Look at them” in a hope of drawing attention away from their own faults.

And you nottoosmart" can go to your Brothel you call a church.

'll keep you in my prayers, you have a lot of demons.

 

[NotTooSmart]

Thank you for the flattery NotTooSmart, I’m glad you enjoyed my post. I understand you might be busy, or the thought might have simply slipped your mind, but you still haven’t responded to what I wrote (assuming you so desire).

Here’s my post again:

I did, post 120 on page 8.

Yeah…I miss posts too.

 

[Non_Serviam]

Our legal system operates under these rules. If I am a victim of wrongful behavior by one member of the coalition acting on behalf of the coalition, I can suit the coalition for damages. And get awarded big bucks. And that is happening with the assorted suits victims of the priest sex abuse scandals are bringing against the Catholic Church (not to mention the suits against McDonalds for its operatives spilling coffee).

To cite another example, the torture of Iraqi prisoners at Abu Ghraib. Now as far as we know this was done solely by low-level operatives in the US Army. Now there may or may not be some complicitness further up the food chain, but I don’t know.

But, this torture was done by representatives of the United States in the armed forces acting on behalf of the United States. So in this context, it is perfectly legitimate to say that the United States tortured Iraqi prisoners at Abu Grhaib.

I’m popping in to congratulate NotTooSmart for a masterful exposure of the inconsistent “answers” given by many here and their special pleading about the “church”.

There have been a number of threads over time that have tried to point out this error in the reasoning of a number of Catholics on the forum, but your thread is the first that has resisted all Catholic attempts to deflect the discussion via:

a) insult
b) ridicule
c) pseudo-philosophizing (i.e. your argument isn’t “valid”)
d) “Protestants are just as bad/worse” arguments
e) red herrings about unrelated questions

NotTooSmart, continue to demonstrate that they can’t congratulate the church for the good and insulate it from the bad. Here are three quick examples to help you out:

1. As posters on this thread have pointed out, and as so many on here like to (mis)quote Ignatius "Wherever the bishop shall appear…there is the Catholic Church. To return to the OP, those (arch)dioceses where the (arch)Bishop did wrong by permitting abuse to continue and by protecting those who abused, those were the acts of the Catholic Church in that region.
2. Jesus, after Peter had cut off the servant’s ear, took responsibility for his disciple’s actions and healed the servant. Jesus did not stand there and tell the crowd how Peter’s actions were those of an individual and not at all (name removed by moderator)utable to him, rather He was accountable for the acts of those in His church and acknowledged His responsibility to act to clear up the negative.
3. Balaam’s donkey was used by God to deliver His Word. Likewise, Jesus said the rocks could cry out in praise to God. The RCC has no more basis for pride in the canon than do this donkey or the rocks. The perogative rests totally with God as NotTooSmart has pointed out in more than one post.

Finally if a number of individual Senators are taking bribes and practicing corruption, one can correctly say that the Senate is corrupt even if all Senators are not acting in a corrupt coalition.

Your examples of Israel’s sin at Ai and of the US in Iraq make your point so well that almost none have dared to comment on them-stay focused and keep up the good work keeping folks honest!

 

[Bill_Pick]

NOTTOOSMART, Will you please show me where the CC said they had nothing to do with the inguisition,yes we did have the ingvisition and the prisiet had so thing to do with the sex abuse case but I do not know about your church but the CC is full of sinners,and the CC is run by sinners.
Now let me ask you a question ,what do you know about the inguisition how many did we have, who was they with and how long did they last and how many people do you think lost their lives.
Do you think these are fair questions. You was just trying to fish to see if Cathloic are going to omit to all this and when you been around for almost 2000 yesrs thing dont always go as you like but nothing that happen are us Cathloic a shame of beside we have Jesus Christ on our side, The gates of Hell Ect.

 

[latin_rite]

I’m popping in to congratulate NotTooSmart for a masterful exposure of the inconsistent “answers” given by many here and their special pleading about the “church”.

There have been a number of threads over time that have tried to point out this error in the reasoning of a number of Catholics on the forum, but your thread is the first that has resisted all Catholic attempts to deflect the discussion via:

a) insult
b) ridicule
c) pseudo-philosophizing (i.e. your argument isn’t “valid”)
d) “Protestants are just as bad/worse” arguments
e) red herrings about unrelated questions

NotTooSmart, continue to demonstrate that they can’t congratulate the church for the good and insulate it from the bad. Here are three quick examples to help you out:

1. As posters on this thread have pointed out, and as so many on here like to (mis)quote Ignatius "Wherever the bishop shall appear…there is the Catholic Church. To return to the OP, those (arch)dioceses where the (arch)Bishop did wrong by permitting abuse to continue and by protecting those who abused, those were the acts of the Catholic Church in that region.
2. Jesus, after Peter had cut off the servant’s ear, took responsibility for his disciple’s actions and healed the servant. Jesus did not stand there and tell the crowd how Peter’s actions were those of an individual and not at all (name removed by moderator)utable to him, rather He was accountable for the acts of those in His church and acknowledged His responsibility to act to clear up the negative.
3. Balaam’s donkey was used by God to deliver His Word. Likewise, Jesus said the rocks could cry out in praise to God. The RCC has no more basis for pride in the canon than do this donkey or the rocks. The perogative rests totally with God as NotTooSmart has pointed out in more than one post.

Finally if a number of individual Senators are taking bribes and practicing corruption, one can correctly say that the Senate is corrupt even if all Senators are not acting in a corrupt coalition.

Your examples of Israel’s sin at Ai and of the US in Iraq make your point so well that almost none have dared to comment on them-stay focused and keep up the good work keeping folks honest!

Is the problem of pedophile priest Catholic teaching?—No it isn’t.
Do we say we are all perfect? No we aren’t.
Are we trying to address the problems that infect the Church? Yes we are.
What is your and nottoosmart point/s? You are building this non excistent situation and arguing against it. Why? I don’t really know. All i can think of is that you two are jealous losers. Who are upset because Catholics are the chosen people of Jesus. He chose us to protect his word and his laws. And not people like you. I’m sorry if this upsets you and makes you a even more pathetic sad person. But don’t blame me. After all we Catholics aren’t self appointed. Unlike many “christian” wanna bes.

 

[KindredSoul]

…unless you also want to say that the Catholic church gave us the inquisition and the priest sex abuse scandals.

The point being that you can not take credit for the positive while at the same time pass the buck on the negative. A little consistency on this please.

Let us review what can and cannot be considered an official Teaching of the Church: It must be either a Doctrinal belief or a Moral belief.

Determining the Canon of the Bible is both Doctrinal and Moral, and its determination is clearly a case where the Church is actively and universally defining the two, as it canonizes in one fell swoop the usefulness (though certainly not stand-alone) of those books in our search for Morality and Truth. It affirms the teachings of the Bible as true and sound, a statement at once Doctrinal and Moral, and since the Canon was to apply universally, it meets all the criteria for being an Infallible, official teaching.

Priest sex abuse scandals have nothing to with the Church actively promoting such abuse in our Doctrine or official Moral Teaching, as the Church leaders, for all their faults, have never given anything in the way of a statement saying “It is good and just to abuse children or offend those who do”; thus it has nothing in common with canonizing the Bible, which the Church actively and unapologetically did.

Likewise, the inquisition was a collective and isolated action, which in no way established a Doctrinal Reality or an Ethical One. It was an ethical incident, to be sure, but not an ethical definition. To imply that an isolated incident within history was ever intended to apply to universal and timeless Ethic and Doctrine simply makes no legitimate sense. There isn’t and never could be an infallible statement saying “The Inquisition is okay” because infallible teaching must apply to something more universal and timeless than that. If a Pope commissions people to kill people, that is a practical command, and isn’t even structured in the correct manner to be an infallible definition of Doctrinal and Ethical realities. Just as if I tell you to kill someone, I am not defining any truth to you–I am simply telling you to do something, which defines nothing of its morality. Thus this likewise is of a totally different nature than the canonization of the Bible.

So it is with all the negative, and many of the good, things throughout Church history. It’s not only the bad things that we deny are parts of official Catholicism. Many good fruits accomplished by Catholics throughout history are still not the stuff of infallible pronouncements. For instance, the Catholic school system is a good fruit of Catholic people just as the inquisition was a bad fruit of Catholic people. Just like the Inquisition, it is impossible for a School System to be part of what Catholicism (as opposed to Catholic people) has given the world. So, unlike you imply, we are not conveniently choosing to say our religion (Catholicism, which many refer to as “The Church” since the Church is the revealer of that religion) gave us every single good thing Catholics have ever done. That we do not believe our religion itself has given us the bad things is obvious and suggests no devious or sneaky manipulation of the facts. If a person believed their religion itself (as opposed to misunderstandings and misinterpretations) was a source of bad, why would they continue to follow it?

So there is a difference in the things between which you draw a parallel. This has probably been said at some point (this thread grew very quickly) since it is rather obvious, and so if you have brought up other arguments after that one was refuted, I cannot deal with those until I have them.

Blessings in Christ,
KindredSoul

P.S. I see that you have had people insult you because of your name. I assume your name is meant to be tongue-in-cheek and make no attempt to insult you for it, but I would have advised you to have chosen something that didn’t lend itself easily to angry insults. If you are hoping to be insulted so as to make Catholics look bad, as your signature leads me to believe, I must point out that unlike your signature suggests, such insults have nothing to do with Catholicism being bad nor the Holy Spirit of love lacking in Catholicism any more than in Bible-Only Christianity. I can attest, people of all beliefs can get easily worked up and hostile when those beliefs are attacked. So please do not suggest that this universal (as in, found in every line of belief, not necessarily in every individual) phenomenon proves anything, as that would be fallacious.

 

[Bill_Pick]

This is what someone on here had to say “”""“Finally if a number of individual Senators are taking bribes and practicing corruption, one can correctly say that the Senate is corrupt even if all Senators are not acting in a corrupt coalition.:”""" this is just hog wash. What about Nixon in the USA Does that mean all pres, are corrruption,if one husband on a block is have affair so all husband on the block are.
if the CC did not give us the Bible who did the prost, did not get hear until 1500 years later. So Judas Kill him self so does all the apostle have to kill them self.
You need pray
We have a policeman here taking a bribe to day they put him in jail so do we put all are police in jail friday

 

[Randy_Carson]

…unless you also want to say that the Catholic church gave us the inquisition and the priest sex abuse scandals.

The point being that you can not take credit for the positive while at the same time pass the buck on the negative. A little consistency on this please.

God used the Church that He promised to build, the Catholic Church, to pen, preach, preserve, protect and promulgate the Bible that you hold so dearly.

That same Church has also been connected with the Inquisition and the priest sex abuse scandals.

So what?

 

[nlm]

The point being is that the Catholic Church did not GIVE us the scandals. The priests in question committed the sins on their own. The cover up only made matters worse.

BTW - Did you ever stop to think that maybe, just maybe, some of those priests who committed these crimes sincerely repented to their bishop, made a good confession and were absolved in the sacrament of Penance? If that had happened, the seal of confession was in effect and the bishop could not discuss the matter with anyone?

---

Faith without works is dead faith.

Works without faith are dead works.

You are forgetting something here. Don’t forget that at least some of those bishops were approached by the children and their families. Even if the bishops were bound by the seal of confession it would not apply to the information which came from meetings held with them in their office.They could have taken that and acted on it.NLM

 

[NotTooSmart]

God used the Church that He promised to build, the Catholic Church, to pen, preach, preserve, protect and promulgate the Bible that you hold so dearly.

That same Church has also been connected with the Inquisition and the priest sex abuse scandals.

So what?

OK.

You are taking credit for the positive (a little too proudly for my preferences, but I’ll let that slide for now…I don’t want to nitpick…as well as the implications for Catholic theology that I don’t agree with…but I’ll let that slide also because not relevant to issue at hand…and I sort of have issues with the shared history issue…but I am letting that slide too…don’t want to nitpick and be too argumentative here…how is this for a run-on sentence).

But you are not passing the buck on the negative (although has been connected sounds a little weak to me…but I’ll let that pass also. Again I don’t want to be nitpicky here)…

So…

You’re good.

 

[KindredSoul]

NotTooSmart, continue to demonstrate that they can’t congratulate the church for the good and insulate it from the bad. Here are three quick examples to help you out:

1. As posters on this thread have pointed out, and as so many on here like to (mis)quote Ignatius "Wherever the bishop shall appear…there is the Catholic Church. To return to the OP, those (arch)dioceses where the (arch)Bishop did wrong by permitting abuse to continue and by protecting those who abused, those were the acts of the Catholic Church in that region.

That the Catholic Church exists wherever the bishop appears doesn’t mean that everything the Bishop says is a teaching of Catholicism. While I understand how you would come to that conclusion, it doesn’t automatically follow from the premise.

1. Jesus, after Peter had cut off the servant’s ear, took responsibility for his disciple’s actions and healed the servant. Jesus did not stand there and tell the crowd how Peter’s actions were those of an individual and not at all (name removed by moderator)utable to him, rather He was accountable for the acts of those in His church and acknowledged His responsibility to act to clear up the negative.

Exactly how did Jesus take responsibility for Peter cutting off the servant’s ear? He did what was in His power to heal the servant, but in no way does that imply He said it was His own fault that Peter cut off the servant’s ear. Likewise, the Church should do, whenever possible, what it can to amend the mistakes Her followers have made in the past. However, that does not make those mistakes a fault of Catholicism anymore than Peter’s violent act was Jesus’ fault–to even suggest that anything was the fault of Jesus is not a claim I would feel safe to make at all.

1. Balaam’s donkey was used by God to deliver His Word. Likewise, Jesus said the rocks could cry out in praise to God. The RCC has no more basis for pride in the canon than do this donkey or the rocks. The perogative rests totally with God as NotTooSmart has pointed out in more than one post.

Just because rocks and donkeys have been used by God before doesn’t mean that the Catholic Church is not being continually used to deliver God’s word in the present age. I do not even understand how that can be inferred. It has nothing to do with the Church saying “Look at me! I’m the Church God is using to spread His word, Losers!!!” It is instead about the Church speaking the simple Truth–no matter whether God has used Donkeys, rocks, or even if He had used cockroaches to spread His Word in the past, now He is primarily using the Church to fulfill that function. Where is the pride in speaking the simple truth if that is what we honestly believe?

Finally if a number of individual Senators are taking bribes and practicing corruption, one can correctly say that the Senate is corrupt even if all Senators are not acting in a corrupt coalition.

Though one might say “corrupt Senate” as a convenient shorthand, it would be more technically accurate to say there is corruption in the Senate. Though this is a technicality, it makes a difference. If the Senate is corrupt, this implies that the very institution in itself is illegitimate and needs to be replaced with a totally different system, as it implies that the Senate in itself, regardless of what kind of people are in it, is a bad thing and has been proven so. If that corruption is only due to the nature and underhandedness of its members, the system itself may work perfectly fine and trying to do away with the system itself in that case would be throwing out the baby with the bathwater. The same thing applies to the Church and those historic cases where there were corrupt clergy. Leaving the Church or losing faith in Catholicism itself (deciding the Church as an institution and a religious entity was bad) wasn’t necessarily the answer. Clearly you disagree, but it doesn’t follow of necessity from the given evidence (the corrupt clergy).

Blessings in Christ,
KindredSoul

 

[NotTooSmart]

I’m popping in to congratulate NotTooSmart for a masterful exposure of the inconsistent “answers” given by many here and their special pleading about the “church”.

thanx a bunch. But I really am NotTooSmart in all of this stuff.