Pope reinstates bishop who denies the Holocaust

[Mr.Canada]

Enjoy!

There are child abusers in every vocation in every sector of society. 0.2% of Priests are child abusers. It's terrible but not nearly as widespread as the MSM would have you believe. I never said the RCC was perfect. That's why it's like kicking a puppy because everyone seems to think that the RCC need be perfect in order to be relevant. This position is absurd.

[ToadBrother]

There are child abusers in every vocation in every sector of society. 0.2% of Priests are child abusers. It's terrible but not nearly as widespread as the MSM would have you believe. I never said the RCC was perfect. That's why it's like kicking a puppy because everyone seems to think that the RCC need be perfect in order to be relevant. This position is absurd.

The problem here is the hypocrisy of, on the one hand, claiming to be one of the champions of human dignity and ultimately of divine revelation, and on the other hand, systematically over decades in multiple countries having looked the other way as pedophiles destroyed children.

At any rate, I don't disagree with you that pedophiles have been protected by many groups. It's always the same thing, the desire to protect the institution from the harm of bad press, and ultimately the moral depravity the arises from trying to hide the wrongdoing of members.

[Mr.Canada]

The problem here is the hypocrisy of, on the one hand, claiming to be one of the champions of human dignity and ultimately of divine revelation, and on the other hand, systematically over decades in multiple countries having looked the other way as pedophiles destroyed children.

At any rate, I don't disagree with you that pedophiles have been protected by many groups. It's always the same thing, the desire to protect the institution from the harm of bad press, and ultimately the moral depravity the arises from trying to hide the wrongdoing of members.

The RCC now has lengthy pysc evaluations for everyone in the seminary in addition to other measures being taken. I doubt that the public school system does this and theirs much more abuse in the public school system.

[ToadBrother]

The RCC now has lengthy pysc evaluations for everyone in the seminary in addition to other measures being taken. I doubt that the public school system does this and theirs much more abuse in the public school system.

Frankly, I think you're just making that last part up, but if you got the actual statistics, then by all means provide them.

Due diligence requires background checks, but not even that is going to catch all pedophiles. One good thing out of this is that people, at least in Western countries, are going to be much more apt not to look to the Church when a kid is molested, but will go straight to the cops.

[scorpio]

There are child abusers in every vocation in every sector of society. 0.2% of Priests are child abusers. It's terrible but not nearly as widespread as the MSM would have you believe. I never said the RCC was perfect. That's why it's like kicking a puppy because everyone seems to think that the RCC need be perfect in order to be relevant. This position is absurd.

The cover-up involves a lot more people, including priests, bishops, cardinals, and Popes (Crimen sollicitationis) and even the current one link

[Mr.Canada]

Frankly, I think you're just making that last part up, but if you got the actual statistics, then by all means provide them.

found almost 11,000 cases of abuse by about 4,000 priests and deacons since 1950.

To support her contention, Shakeshaft compared the priest abuse data with data collected in a national survey for the American Association of University Women Educational Foundation in 2000. Extrapolating data from the latter, she estimated roughly 290,000 students experienced some sort of physical sexual abuse by a school employee from a single decade—1991-2000. That compares with about five decades of cases of abusive priests.

Such figures led her to contend "the physical sexual abuse of students in schools is likely more than 100 times the abuse by priests."

Source/Full story

As I said abuse is many times more oft occurring in the public school system but isn't reported on by the MSM as much.

[guyser]

Source/Full story

As I said abuse is many times more oft occurring in the public school system but isn't reported on by the MSM as much.

Unfortunately your link doesn not back you up.

For one, its Newsmax, which is hardly trustworthy.

Secondly, the comparison was not in any way equal. SHakeshaft included 'verbal abuse' as the same as sexual abuse. Obviously she aint a bag of brights is she?

And it goes on to say, in a conflicting report, "Nan Stein, director of a project on sexual harassment in schools at the Center for Research on Women at Wellesley College, cited far fewer cases annually than Shakeshaft; she said she believes "several hundred" cases of student-teacher sexual abuse cases occur each year"

Damn huh?

[cybercoma]

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/stor...?hub=TopStories

Looks like this priest's reinstatement will hurt Catholic-Jewish relations in a large way.

The only natural possessions we have as people are our thoughts. Regardless of how distasteful they may seem to others, everyone is certainly entitled to think whatever they would like and express those thoughts.

[jdobbin]

The only natural possessions we have as people are our thoughts. Regardless of how distasteful they may seem to others, everyone is certainly entitled to think whatever they would like and express those thoughts.

And the Jewish community probably thinks that there are a lot of people high up in the Catholic Church that give a lot of credence to what this re-instated priest says.

[CANADIEN]

The advantage of being a freethinker, is the freedom of having that independent perspective, and not having to grudgingly support foul characters like Ratzinger.

Your slavish devotion to the "religion is bad, and those with faith can't think for themselves" view point is not what I would call freethinking or an independant perspective. It is merely droning the same line over and over again, only with some variations in tones.

A real independant perspective would include noting the difference between acknowledging a person's (in this case Joseph Ratzinger) weaknesses and portraying him as a kind of human monster it is not.

[CANADIEN]

Benny is a little murky on that Jewish Covenant though, since he also maintains that Jews have to accept Jesus Christ for salvation -- so what is the point of God maintaining an inferior covenant, when there is suppose to be this universal, all-encompassing covenant with Christ? There isn't, and he knows it, and that's why he clutters his writings on the subject with obscure theological ramblings that most Catholics won't understand anyway.

A bit of a simplistic view, that only makes sense is one is to assume that God has voided his own Covenant with his Chosen People.

Equally simplistic is the idea that is wrong to assume that one holds the truth and others don't. The source of conflict is not the fact that people believe that their faith, or political opinion, or philosophy is the only true one; it is that flaw in human character that seeks to destroy those who are different or think differently. The solution is the respectful acceptance of the right of the other to be and to think diffrently, even wrongly, which excludes coertion but certainly not real efforts at convincing the other. It is not to abdicate one core beliefs because "everyone is right at the same time", which is only an other way of saying "everyone is wrong at the same time".

[CANADIEN]

WTF does that even mean? The Church isn't a puppy, it's an ancient, extraordinarily wealthy institution which has survived for the better part of 2000 years. I'm sure it can survive a few people pointing out that reversing an excommunication of a vile, repugnant anti-Semite simply because the guy happens to despise Vatican II as much as Ratzinger does is expediency at its worst.

The notion that the Pope despises Vatican II just because he is a conservative is a bit simplistic. His writings over the years have made it clear that this is not the case.

[WIP]

You don't belong yet feel you should have a say in how we run our CHurch? I find it amusing. Please continue your anti-Catholic rants. Jack Chick would be proud.

As long as your church expects to have a say in political discourse, such as public funding for Catholic schools and influence public policy on social issues such as abortion, birth control and embryonic stem cell research -- then the nonCatholic members of society have a right to voice their opinions about the Church and its policies.

[WIP]

Your slavish devotion to the "religion is bad, and those with faith can't think for themselves" view point is not what I would call freethinking or an independant perspective. It is merely droning the same line over and over again, only with some variations in tones.

Looking in from the outside, it's hard to see what you find to be so wonderful about this religion! Religion, as a belief system, stubbornly resists progress and the institutions which run the system are corrupted by the extraordinary power and influence they wield over the adherents of the faith. At best, rational, humanistic adherents can buff off the rough edges of their religions, so that they cause less harm to others -- I don't see where any major religion contributes to society because of its doctrinal beliefs. And the good things done by religions are also done by secular institutions that are not doing good works just to proselytize and win converts, even though they have a lesser degree of tax-exempt status.

A real independant perspective would include noting the difference between acknowledging a person's (in this case Joseph Ratzinger) weaknesses and portraying him as a kind of human monster it is not.

You are applying wishful thinking to find anything of real merit in this man. All I see is someone with a lust for power, cunning and deceit.

[Mr.Canada]

As long as your church expects to have a say in political discourse, such as public funding for Catholic schools and influence public policy on social issues such as abortion, birth control and embryonic stem cell research -- then the nonCatholic members of society have a right to voice their opinions about the Church and its policies.

Imo people dislike the Catholic Church because they take the moral position on many issues and don't waver and are inflexible in their support. That's actually one thing I admire about the RCC. They take a position on an issue and don't waffle no matter how popular or how much pressure the Church comes under they stand strong and defiant in the face of secular pop culture. It inspires me to be just as unwavering in my conviction and to stand up for defense babies in the womb and to be against breeding human life in a lab just to kill it in the name of research. These things are wrong and I'll never stop in my pursuit of these things being banned.

Edited January 27, 2009 by Mr.Canada

[WIP]

A bit of a simplistic view, that only makes sense is one is to assume that God has voided his own Covenant with his Chosen People.

This was not only the mainstream Protestant view until recent years, it was also Catholic doctrine until Vatican II created the term: "people of God" as a common classification of Christians and Jews; so the doctrine that Jews could still have their own divine covenant does not have a very long history in the Catholic Church, and it is an ill-defined concept since they are teaching that the Mosaic Covenant cannot provide salvation for the Jews, and this is only available through Christ....so they got a lot of people asking what sort of relationship they are seeking with Jews and Judaism.

Equally simplistic is the idea that is wrong to assume that one holds the truth and others don't. The source of conflict is not the fact that people believe that their faith, or political opinion, or philosophy is the only true one; it is that flaw in human character that seeks to destroy those who are different or think differently.

No! Believing you have exclusive access to God and salvation is at least getting off on the wrong foot in dealing with others. Most tactful Christians who believe in an exclusive salvation, tend to keep their thoughts to themselves on this issue. For myself, the good news is that most adherents either don't understand their church's doctrine of salvation, or reject it because of the obvious immoral implications of condemning good people for having the wrong beliefs....Even in the United States, which we are told is the most religiously fundamentalist of the developed nations of the world, a recent Pew Survey found that 52% of Americans believe that at least some non-christian religions can provide eternal life! 77% of U.S. Catholics said that Jews can go to heaven, 62% of Catholics said Muslims can go to heaven, and the most surprising finding - 49% of Catholics said that atheists can go to heaven. Similar numbers were posted by mainstream Protestants; the only group who overwhelmingly believed non-Judeochristians were heading for hell was...no surprise, white evangelicals!

http://pewforum.org/docs/?DocID=380

So, in the longrun, us non-Christians and unbelievers can take solace in the fact that most believers reject the concept of exclusive salvation for whatever reasons; but this is not what the church authorities are trying to teach, and they likely aren't too happy that their congregants have adopted universalism.

[WIP]

Imo people dislike the Catholic Church because they take the moral position on many issues and don't waver and are inflexible in their support.

I don't find being inflexible to be an admirable quality! The Church has created a set of absolute standards that they claim divine inspiration for. When they need to be changed or modified, changing or reforming them is a difficult process, because it risks the whole dogma of divine guidance and revelation.

Real moral positions need to be cross-referenced with the consequences of applying these standards. Causing unnecessary harm to people, as your priests and bishops in Africa have done on a large scale, through denying condoms and birth control information in countries where AIDS is rampant, is not real morality! It is just a false claim of being moral, by stubbornly clinging to an arbitrary rule against birth control.

That's actually one thing I admire about the RCC. They take a position on an issue and don't waffle no matter how popular or how much pressure the Church comes under they stand strong and defiant in the face of secular pop culture. It inspires me to be just as unwavering in my conviction and to stand up for defense babies in the womb and to be against breeding human life in a lab just to kill it in the name of research. These things are wrong and I'll never stop in my pursuit of these things being banned.

But because you define a "baby" as a fertilized egg, we have no common ground for defending babies in the womb. The concept that a fertilized egg in the womb or in a test tube is a human with a soul, is a backward, superstitious myth that can't be supported with any real evidence. It is no higher than the fear of New Guinea tribesmen who were afraid that cameras taking pictures of them were stealing their souls. So, you and your church can do whatever you like to propagate mythology as truth, and those of us who want real evidence and real morality will fight you at every turn.

[CANADIEN]

This was not only the mainstream Protestant view until recent years, it was also Catholic doctrine until Vatican II created the term: "people of God" as a common classification of Christians and Jews; so the doctrine that Jews could still have their own divine covenant does not have a very long history in the Catholic Church, and it is an ill-defined concept since they are teaching that the Mosaic Covenant cannot provide salvation for the Jews, and this is only available through Christ....so they got a lot of people asking what sort of relationship they are seeking with Jews and Judaism.

No! Believing you have exclusive access to God and salvation is at least getting off on the wrong foot in dealing with others. Most tactful Christians who believe in an exclusive salvation, tend to keep their thoughts to themselves on this issue. For myself, the good news is that most adherents either don't understand their church's doctrine of salvation, or reject it because of the obvious immoral implications of condemning good people for having the wrong beliefs....Even in the United States, which we are told is the most religiously fundamentalist of the developed nations of the world, a recent Pew Survey found that 52% of Americans believe that at least some non-christian religions can provide eternal life! 77% of U.S. Catholics said that Jews can go to heaven, 62% of Catholics said Muslims can go to heaven, and the most surprising finding - 49% of Catholics said that atheists can go to heaven. Similar numbers were posted by mainstream Protestants; the only group who overwhelmingly believed non-Judeochristians were heading for hell was...no surprise, white evangelicals!

http://pewforum.org/docs/?DocID=380

So, in the longrun, us non-Christians and unbelievers can take solace in the fact that most believers reject the concept of exclusive salvation for whatever reasons; but this is not what the church authorities are trying to teach, and they likely aren't too happy that their congregants have adopted universalism.

Indeed, people can be wrong and still be saved. Which proves my point that the problem with core beliefs is not what is believed, but how people deal with others of different faiths and opinions.

[jdobbin]

I fully support the Jews and Israel but the math of that one thing doesn't add up unless I've been reading the wrong cites.

Looks like the Pope has given you your marching orders.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...ml?hpid=topnews

This morning, Benedict made his first public comments on the controversy, telling pilgrims in his weekly audience in Vatican City that he feels "full and indisputable" solidarity with Jews and repudiating the idea of denying the Holocaust.

According to an Associated Press account of his remarks, Benedict said the memory of the Holocaust should "prompt humanity to reflect on the unpredictable power of evil when it conquers the hearts of men."

[Mr.Canada]

Looks like the Pope has given you your marching orders.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...ml?hpid=topnews

Of coarse I agree with The Holy Father. Deniers must be stopped. Jewish people suffered a great tragedy and those that deny it shouldn't be tolerated.

[normanchateau]

The Red Cross actually had done the math and have reported 1 million deaths in the camps. I can give a cite if needed.

The citation you have of the Red Cross "claims" comes from an anti-Semitic holocaust denial site. I challenge you to provide a citation which originates with the Red Cross as opposed to a secondary source.

[Mr.Canada]

This is really a good thing as it demonstrates that the church is looking to recapture it's traditional ways and make amends with pre VII Catholics. This is a very good thing for all Catholics.

[CANADIEN]

Of coarse I agree with The Holy Father. Deniers must be stopped. Jewish people suffered a great tragedy and those that deny it shouldn't be tolerated.

That includes those who put up websites with bogus "Red Cross" statistics "ahowing" than less than 1 million Jews died in Nazi camps.

[CANADIEN]

This is really a good thing as it demonstrates that the church is looking to recapture it's traditional ways and make amends with pre VII Catholics. This is a very good thing for all Catholics.

Vatican II was inspired by the Spirit. If anybody needs to make amends, it is those who rejected the Spirit and the Church when they rejected VII.

[CANADIEN]

The citation you have of the Red Cross "claims" comes from an anti-Semitic holocaust denial site. I challenge you to provide a citation which originates with the Red Cross as opposed to a secondary source.

I put a few citations from the Red Cross a few days ago, that tells a story totally different than those bogus sites. I was not able to find a single one there that support the "less than one million dead in the camps" lie.