Reply With Quote
Hector, how come you never responded to Goliadnative?
I hadn't seen his post. It would've saved me time and posts
"Made" by Paul himself. And who is to say Jesus had nothing to do with what Paul says in 2 Tim?
Hector, how come you never responded to Goliadnative?
I hadn't seen his post. It would've saved me time and posts
Last edited by smeagol; 10-18-2006 at 06:56 AM.
You know there were dozens of Gospels floating around in the III century?
And the same Church that proclaimed these four are the inspired ones, with the help of the Holy Spirit, is the one you are bashing now. You believe in the Gospels and only the Gospels but don't believe in the one en y that was around 2,000 years ago to put together these Gospels, but even more so, was around to see what Christ did when he was alive, which might not even be in the Gospels.
Actually, this en y was created by Jesus himself. There lies the irony.
C'mon dude, you really need to learn the religion you profess.
Sorry for posting so many times (record of consecutive posts?).
I was too busy at work today and this thread it too good to pass.
I'm out now.
TBC tomorrow
God Bless you all.
In some cases the crimes were covered up by Church authorities and the perpetrators moved to another location, sometimes repeatedly. In the worst cases these involved pedophile priests with continued access to children as a result (see, for example, the Ferns report). Criticism of the Church and its leadership followed, especially as some high-ranking Church clergy failed to disclose information about certain sex abuse cases involving law breaking to government authorities.
While the reported sexual abuse by the clergy related to incidents predominantly from the 1960s to 1980s.[9] some cases occurred in the 1990s and sexual abuse has also happened in the distant past. It was the topic of Pope Benedict XIV's apostolic cons ution Sacramentum Poenitentiae in 1741.
Do you know how to google?
Completely false. Met with the priest saturday and he said that was not a requirement. It would only make the paperwork easier.
I do know a friend that recently told a catholic priest to off after the priest told him that since him and his catholic wife were married in a Lutheran church that the Catholic church did not recognize the marriage and would need to be remarried for him to join though.
So how large was his congregation?
Catholic parishes are not small. Those "megachurches" you hear about? They only get called that because there might be only one or two services for the entire congregation...which might be a few thousand. (And yes, I know there are a few REALLY LARGE ones...but a "megachurch" seems to come into being at around 2-3000 people...don't quote me on that number....)
My parish here in SA is about 4200 families. I don't have a full head-count. And that figure is NOT the largest here in town. It is not uncommon for a parish to have 1000+ families. But you don't ever hear them called "megachurches".
A pastor of an "average" parish in general has many many more people to take spiritual care of than a pastor of an "average" church. Not to mention in out-of-the-way communities, the local parish priest might be the only one for miles...and civil organizations (police, fire, hospitals, stuff like that) call on his services too.
It was only in the last couple of months that my parish got a (temporary, as I understand it) associate pastor. For several months our pastor had that 4200 family parish all to himself...the poor guy was getting run into the ground. And if he'd had a family? Poor things...
Celibacy is a discipline, not a dogma. It could be changed. I certainly won't leave the Church if they do. But it is not a bad thing.
Oh, and the rest of you...stop with the bigoted BS about "celibacy causes priests to molest little boys" and crap like that. You have absolutely no case...just a bigoted mindset. There are no increases in the rate of sexual depravity among priests compared to Protestant pastors, teachers, or other fields. None. So get away from the lies.
God Bless everyone.
that doesn't sound right - the Catholic Church recognizes sacraments performed in other churches - you don't have to get re-baptized to be a Catholic like a lot of Protestant churches require. Maybe the priests i knew were a lot more liberal than that one though.
Celibacy may very well be a gift that's not for everyone.
Therein lies the problem. A lot of these priests AREN"T cut out for it.
IMO, more and more priests are the outcasts of society nowdays beforee they decide to be a priest. Meaning i believe they have problems enough being awkward before they decide.
What happans when you take sex away? The average guy masterbates a LOT, LOT more. Bubba in prison butt s Tyrone even though there macho, straight men. The priests that aren't special in that aspect look admiringly at your sons and nephews.
For s sake, The most ed up priest more than likely abducted Jacob Wetterling, poster child, years ago for his own enjoyment and the church has been covering it up ever since. That monastary was known prior to that incident as a "safehaven, rehab" for troubled priests.
The church doesn't dismiss these guys and go the police, they try with all their might to protect "God's sons"
I've been gone for hours, Smeagol, and I know you're on line now...too much to respond to, but I picked this post as a jumping-in point.
I am not feverishly Anti-Catholic; I was raised Catholic, my wife (in 1990 before we were married) converted to Catholicism - from Baptist; as recently as 18 months ago, my kids were in Catholic school, and not just any Catholic School - The Atonement Academy - where they attended mass daily, and received a great education; however we had to move from SA, and the local Catholic school is not to our liking (too secular & the academics are not challenging).
I am not "bashing" the church, nor am I a great biblical scholar (raised Catholic, remember
However since I have been attending non-Catholic churches for more than a decade now, it has become glaringly apparent that the Catholic Church does a poor job of teaching its parishiners the simple, profound message and purpose of Jesus's life on earth.
Forget Dogma and everything else, where the tire meets the pavement, most Catholics beleive:
1. Go to Church
2. Take Communion
3. Go to Confession
4. Say your prayers
5. Be good
6. Go to Heaven
It is taught as a recipe, again, similar to Judaism
They are additionally taught and believe in their inherent superiority to Protestanism, and are convinced that Protestants are simply lost sheep and will find their way back home. They do not understand the very serious biblical discussions that go on weekly in every Protestant church I have attended - by many, many more members of the congregation than actively participate in such discussions at a Catholic Church. They don't sit around and talk about what's wrong with Catholics, or how horrible the Church is, they study the bible and try to grasp the teachings of our lord - as the bible (Jesus) commands us to do. They develop a relationship with Him.
That was missing in the many years of my Catholic life. I did not know Jesus - because, frankly, it is not stressed. The list above is stressed.
It's a cliche, but it really is summed up in John 3:16 (NIV)
"For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life."
That's, now, what I believe I have to do to go to heaven.
You make a valid point...
But I don't believe schools or people in other fields protect known perpetrators... that is the one difference. There are countless of do ented cases where it was proven that the Catholic Church aided its ministers by covering up their crimes... and instead of sanctioning them from within... the church authorities would simply move them elsewhere... where, perplexingly enough they were given access to children yet again...
This is what drives 'outsiders' mad... and you or anyone else from the Catholic ins ution would be foolhardy to defend the practice. You all should be enraged like the rest of us -- particularly because it is an ins ution which represents Christ.
Are the rates any worse... probably not. But the above practice is reprehensible by all accounts. You all should embrace the change that would rid the Body of Christ from such shame... not blindlessly defend it, by considering all criticisms of said practice an attack on the whole ins ution itself... and in doing so, sidestepping the issue by deferment. Change should spring from within... but if the members don't acknowledge that there is a problem to begin with, how will they ever purge it away?
No Protestant church I have ever attended or actually heard of requires a "re-baptism". Some Catholics choose to be baptised after they begin attending one of them, however. This was a myth I believed when I was a Catholic, as well.
I have been baptised once - @ St. Josephs on loop 410, as a Catholic.
Protestant churches are much more open with communion, marriage - and my wife, with her Ph.D. in Biochemstry, as a Lutheran, could not get a job as a Science Teacher @ a Catholic school in SA (she briefly toyed with not being a professor anymore). Again, from experience, Catholic Churches are far more discriminatory than any Protestant Church I have attended; although I must admit, they take care of their own. I was born and raised Catholic; I am allowed to take communion when I go to my mother's church, my wife, raised Baptist, and converted, cannot, even though neither of us attend Catholic Church now.
BTW: I don't.
it sounds more and more like you definitely shouldn't get married in a Catholic Church with your vitrioloc posts about priests - does your fiancee have her heart set on it?
plenty of protestant churches in victoria did require a re-baptism. victoria is a weird place though.
Ironically (and absolutely unrelated to the topic): I was born in Victoria.
The Protestants and Eastern Orthodox hadn't split by that time, so what is now the Catholic church can't take all the credit. Protestants claim that history, too.
Paul had a unique and rare Spiritual Gift... So yes he encourages the celibate lifestyle for those that can handle it... much like what Jesus says in Matthew... for those that can handle it. No where does it say that to be a church leader one must give up of the hope of creating their own family.
In some ways... obviously, however, the practice is hurting the church in other ways.
Recommendation does not equate to 'requirement' or 'stipulation'....
The mere mention of celibacy is not enough to stipulate a requirement. It works for some, but not for many. Clearly it doesn't work for everyone.
So interprets the Catholic Church... I am bound to no one on earth except for Christ, since only He is mediator between GOD and men.
If you prefer to have a middle man... that is your perogative.... Again though, Christ died so that we could have an eternal and DIRECT connection with GOD. Don't throw that priviledge away.
Just because the refs suck doesn't mean you need to stop being a spurs fan.
Note to self: Questioning said practice means your discouraged from committing.
C'mon dude, it was a joke, get over yourself.
No one is discouraging you they are just pointing out that through six pages of rhetoric your thoughts and biased opinion on Catholic priests doesn't look like it has been swayed even the tiniest bit, nor does it seem like you have any intention of even considering what many people have very eloquently posted throughout this thread.
You have given some good reasons, and I think I understand it for the first time now. Having said that, your inability to recognize a joke and your obvious tendncy to think you are the smartest man in the world and take yourself far too seriously has now rubbed me the wrong way, you my friend, are a bag. And a catholic one too.
i did not mean that in the slightest - converting would require a serious commitment, but you stated earlier conversion would not be necessary. from the harsh words toward the priesthood in some of your posts i wondered if you really wished to be married in a Catholic Church or to be a part of it.
I do. Do you know how to read?
Clambake said the Pope was covering up for pedophile priests and I asked him for a link.
What you quoted gives no evidence that JP II was covering up this scandal.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions