My Thoughts On Galileo

[fides' Jack]

Seven's already said it, so I won't even go there.

At last the reason behind all this comes out. So you're Coptic! I think that means that you must know the difference between the Roman Catholic Church and the Catholic Church in general, and that it's just your English that's getting in the way of my understanding some of the things you're saying. I've never spoken with a Coptic before. Let me ask you, do you think of yourself as "Catholic"? From what I've read of the Coptics, I have a tremendous amount of respect for them. That being said, I'd also like to say that the way you've presented yourself in this thread does not change my attitude about Coptics in general. I still have a great deal of respect for them, but I sincerely hope they are not all like you.

But in all honesty, the stuff you're spouting out sounds exactly like my old SSPX days. There's very little logic in it and too much emotional charge, that in the end just pulls you away from Christ, whether He's drawing you to Him through the Coptic Church or the Roman Catholic Church. If you're all negative all the time, you can't possibly be getting closer to Christ. Even the first Christians persecuted under the Roman Empire found joy in their suffering, and forgave their transgressors.

Well, you won't apologize, and I think I'm just starting to understand you, so I think I will apologize. I was pretty irritated earlier. Honestly, I'm tired of all the anti-Catholic rhetoric everywhere, and I thought this was just another sample of that. Now I see that this is a different issue entirely. I'm sorry for getting angry with my comments earlier. I've been extremely tired lately, and sometimes my only outlet is here on PM. That's not an excuse, just a logical reason.

[RezaMikhaeil]

[color=#222222][quote name='Seven77' timestamp='1332554799' post='2406790']
You're mistaken to think abuse is reason to leave a Church, Roman or Coptic.
[/quote]

It is a great reason to leave a particular institution. If that institution is systematically abusing children, then it would be wise to disassociate yourself from that organization. Similarly if the Coptic Church ever allowed for "charismatic copts", as the Roman Catholic Church does for "charismatic catholics", I'd probably also leave.

[quote name='Tally Marx' timestamp='1332556692' post='2406843']
I have looked at the figures. In the United States, there's a lower rate of priest-to-child molestation than there is teacher-to-child. What figures have you been looking at? Just anti-Catholic propaganda?[/quote] We're not talking about teacher to child. Once again you're trying to divert the conversation. What I'd said was look at the numbers and they are large. How large? Almost 5,000 priests were involved in the sex scandle in the United States alone. As far as the victims it's substantial but we can never know the full amount because there is no evidence that indicates all victims have come forward. However is seperate from the indigeous children that were abused, for which I was referencing. These are children raped by Clergy, who's families are Roman Catholic and willingly took them to Church and Catholic Schools, such as alter boys. They weren't indigenous. This doesn't even account for a fraction of the number of indigenous children abused. The abuse of indigenous children went on for over a century.

[quote]Did you *read* what I wrote?[/quote] Sure did but it was pointless.

[quote]Well...Catholics weren't allowed to send their kids to Catholic schools in or out of the country at one point in the US (or did you skip that point in history?) and they went to jail (at the least) if they tried...
But that wasn't the people or time period I was speaking of. The *Acadians* weren't given a choice of school, or anything. Their guns were taken from them, they were rounded up, separated, enslaved, murdered, etc. with no option or word. It was simply done to them. Are you seriously trying to say that's a lesser crime?[/quote] Please provide citation because your history is very skewed. Acadians situation was completely different and doesn't even compare to what indigenous people went through. And most importantly, no religious establishment, such as the Roman Catholic Church was doing it to them. This doesn't excuse persecution. If there was a religious institution involved with it, they should also be judged accordingly.

[quote]At first, you seemed to generally sympathize with and be rightously angry with the indigenous people you have heard of. But, now that you are downplaying the terrible things done to the people I speak of, just because they are Catholic and I used them in my example, I see you are not actually a good, sympathetic person. You are on a crusade against the Church and these poor people you are using is just a means to an end. You should be ashamed.[/quote] It's not indigenous people "I have heard of", it's family. Now as for "downplaying the terrible things done to the people that I speak of", I never downplayed it. What I said is that you're incorrectly comparing the two when there is no comparison. Now as for the comment that "you should be ashamed". Why should I be ashamed that my relatives were told to send their children to Roman Catholic Schools or have them snatched out of their arms? While their children were being molested, raped, beaten and often times killed in these schools by priests and nuns... If anyone should apologize for downplaying it, it's you.

[quote]My argument is that you cannot condemn everyone in a group for something that only part of them did. Especially when you don't know how large a part (and you, despite your assertions, don't) did it.[/quote] Wait...what are you saying? That I don't know how large of a part it was? It was nearly all indigenous people in North America, Central and South America. It was Australia and every part of Asia that Roman Catholicism had established itself amongst indigenous people. It was throughout Africa but it was "just a few guys unassociated" right? That's the most ridiculous argument ever made on this forum. You should appologize for being so naive and downplaying how systematic it truly was.

However I never condemned "every Roman Catholic", rather I condemned the institution for such behavior that it fostered for so long. The same way that I condemn the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints for their racism. You don't think that the Patriarchs of the Roman Catholic Church knew about it? Of course they did, many representatives of these indigenous communities wrote to them and did all that they could to stop it. Seriously, grow up and come join reality. If your child is being beaten by a priest on a daily basis, as a mother, you don't think that one would do whatever they could to stop it and protect their children? OF COURSE THEY DID!

[quote]^Does anyone else find it amusing how he calls every statement and source that opposes his assertions "propaganda"? As if calling it that magically discredits it?[/quote] It is propaganda because it's unsustained outside of a few fringe Catholic websites.

[quote]Yes, bad things happened in the Church, done by the members. And they were undoubtedly bad. But my point remains--to condemn an entire institution for what some of its members did is unfair. To say that they are all evil because of what some did is incorrect. To ignore **every good thing** that an institution ever did so that you can wholly condemn it for every wrong thing it ever did is deceitful. To use the plight of people as an excuse for your deceitful crusade is shameful, as is ignoring the plight of people who don't serve your purpose.[/quote] Nobody said every Roman Catholic was guilty and evil. There is not a single sentence of mine where that point was made. However I did make the point that the institution is to be condemned for facilitating it. Huge difference but I don't expect you to know the difference.

[quote]You are unfair, incorrect, deceitful, and should be ashamed.[/quote] You should be ashamed for reducing global and systematic abuse to "a few bad guys". Sorry but it wasn't.[/color]

Edited March 24, 2012 by RezaMikhaeil

[RezaMikhaeil]

[quote name='Tally Marx' timestamp='1332557727' post='2406864']
We could wax eloquent on all the wrongs the Church had done and had done to her, and argue over how many wrongs nullify the good, or how much good renders irrelevant the bad, etc. etc.
My last post sort of makes it sound like that is what we should do. And while taking into account both good and bad things the Church has done is only fair...it is also pointless.[/quote] It's not pointless, if you don't acknowledge history, then you are doomed to repeat it. However it's worse because in the case of the modern molestation and rape cases, the Catholic Church has not co-operated with authorities either. Many important documents were destroyed before the Prosecutors could get their hands on it and many priests were given shelter by the Vatican.

[quote]The Church teaches good. The doctrines are in themselves good. That remains true no matter how many Catholics fail at obeying and living them. The failure of others is not an excuse for us to fail. "Do as they say, not as they do" is what Jesus said.
[/quote]

Really? So I guess the problem was just that thousands and thousands of priests and nuns just didn't understand the doctrine as you so understand it? Pathetic response.

[quote name='fides' Jack' timestamp='1332557748' post='2406865']At last the reason behind all this comes out. So you're Coptic! I think that means that you must know the difference between the Roman Catholic Church and the Catholic Church in general, and that it's just your English that's getting in the way of my understanding some of the things you're saying. I've never spoken with a Coptic before. Let me ask you, do you think of yourself as "Catholic"? From what I've read of the Coptics, I have a tremendous amount of respect for them. That being said, I'd also like to say that the way you've presented yourself in this thread does not change my attitude about Coptics in general. I still have a great deal of respect for them, but I sincerely hope they are not all like you.[/quote] Well I shall say that being Coptic isn't what influences my opinions about the Roman Catholic Church. If I wasn't Coptic I'd still be saying these things because I'm completely honest with myself. You may not agree with what I say but there is no denying that I speak from the heart and that my problems with the Roman Catholic Church are not based upon emotion but personal experience and having studied the issues.

When I was a child I'd thought that Roman Catholic abuse amongst indigenous people in North America and Egypt were isolated incidents. Then I'd read about it and had the priviledge of hearing about it from Aussies and Asians. Then I'd spent several years studying it and realized that it was not isolated. It was global and systematic.

I do consider myself "Catholic", as in part of the pre-schism Church and I'd consider myself part of the Catholic Church body but it's a bit more complicated then that. I do not believe that all Catholics would fit into that definition. This might be a bit contraversial but Charismatic Catholics do not fit into that definition. I'd say that they are closer to Protestantism, Shamanism, and various New age religions then Orthodox Christianity. Now I already know that His Holiness Pope John Paul II didn't mind them and said posetive things about them. I simply think that he was making a mistake and was wrong.

[quote]There's very little logic in it and too much emotional charge, that in the end just pulls you away from Christ, whether He's drawing you to Him through the Coptic Church or the Roman Catholic Church. If you're all negative all the time, you can't possibly be getting closer to Christ. Even the first Christians persecuted under the Roman Empire found joy in their suffering, and forgave their transgressors.[/quote] I'd have to disagree. It's completely logical and not based upon emotion at all. If it were based upon emotion it would be, "Roman Catholics raped my grandfather as a child so they are all devils" but that isn't what I'd said. However it is illogical to believe that it was "a few isolated incidents", when it happened on a global scale to indigenous people of all walks of life, during the same time period, justified by the same set of laws amongst various governments, passed into law by Roman Catholics, etc. In which Bishops ascending to the highest levels of Church government were aware and did nothing. That's an irrational and to be frank quite naive.

Now as for being a Christian, being about justice draws me closer to Jesus Christ. Dr. Cornel West once said, "justice is what love looks like in public" and I believe that to be true. On the contrary, if I could careless that would not be charectoristic of someone who loves humanity or Jesus Christ. Having said that you dont' know me in real life, nor do you barely know me on this forum so you are not a good judge of my charector. If you did know me, you'd know that I'm a father of three children, who's been married for over a decade and makes his living at a factor, while performing magic on the side to bring smiles to people's faces and help them see the beauty in what is right around them.

[quote]Well, you won't apologize, and I think I'm just starting to understand you, so I think I will apologize. I was pretty irritated earlier. Honestly, I'm tired of all the anti-Catholic rhetoric everywhere, and I thought this was just another sample of that. Now I see that this is a different issue entirely. I'm sorry for getting angry with my comments earlier. I've been extremely tired lately, and sometimes my only outlet is here on PM. That's not an excuse, just a logical reason.
[/quote] I would never apologize unless I thought that I was wrong. I won't apologize just because you believe that I should. You are not me and neither would I expect you to apologize if you hasn't an inkling of thought that you were incorrect. I please ask that you don't apologize because I believe that human beings have the right to speak freely and won't ever be offended by you doing so.

A good friend of mine reciently wrote a radical Muslim cleric a "frank" response to a video that he posted about our beloved Pope St. Shenouda III. He later told me that he regrets it and had reported the video to youtube as hate speech. I'd told him that I think that it's great that the Muslim cleric gets to make his opinions known publically because that way people can see him for what he really is. If he just hated in the shadows, he might be more affective and people would possibly be decieved by him.

[Tally Marx]

[quote name='RezaMikhaeil' timestamp='1332561786' post='2406915']
[color=#222222]
We're not talking about teacher to child. Once again you're trying to divert the conversation. What I'd said was look at the numbers and they are large. How large? Almost 5,000 priests were involved in the sex scandle in the United States alone.
....It is propaganda because it's unsustained outside of a few fringe Catholic websites.....
[/quote]

Over how long a period of time? How many priests were there total in the United States during this time? Was every priest accused truly guilty? Furthermore, the Catholic Church is made up of human beings, so to say that bad things happened is really a given; to say that it is bad/evil generally is to imply that it is beyond mere human fault. Therefore, you must provide similar information for other groups/institutions. Jenkins isn't Catholic; his assertions are logically sound and his information and sources are unbiased. You will never know if you do not read the book.


[quote name='RezaMikhaeil' timestamp='1332561786' post='2406915']
[color=#222222]
Sure did but it was pointless.
[/quote]

It proved the point quite well, thank you. A group of people were abused by another group/institution, yet that doesn't justify condemning the entire other group/institution.
If you want abuse on Catholics, specifically, by a religious group, specifically, again...look to England.

[quote name='RezaMikhaeil' timestamp='1332561786' post='2406915']
[color=#222222] Please provide citation because your history is very skewed
[/quote]

"A Great and Noble Scheme" by John Mack Faragher.
Where is the documented history of your people?



[quote name='RezaMikhaeil' timestamp='1332561786' post='2406915']
[color=#222222]Wait...what are you saying? That I don't know how large of a part it was?
[/quote]

In the United States child abuse cases, you clearly don't.
And if you are trying to say that every priest and nun molested every indigenous child in every country for a hundred years straight....you still clearly don't. It happening once is it happening far too often. But I still think your claim is greatly exaggated.


[quote name='RezaMikhaeil' timestamp='1332561786' post='2406915']
[color=#222222] It was throughout Africa but it was "just a few guys unassociated" right?
[/quote]

Unless you can prove that every priest and nun molested every indigenous in every country for the entire time they were there, as you claim, and did this with approval and encouragement of the Church in infallible doctrine, yes. Otherwise, your statement that the Church is unjust is unfounded. Seeing as you think mentioning teachers as a control in such an investigation of statistics is changing the subject, I hardly expect you to get the point, but please listen carefully:
When people of other institutions (like public schools, or even governments) do it, they are not, in the public eye, teachers, homosexuals, or English who are doing such crimes. They are people who happen to be teachers, homosexuals, or English. But not so Catholics, for some reason. If you are to rule out the inherent fault of humanity and get a true picture of the Church, you would need to treat every single institution in the world as you do the Church. Else, you condemn the Catholic Church for merely being made up of human beings. Also, you would have to differentiate between correlation and causation. Were they abusing kids because they were Catholic priests, or because they were European and suffered from the superiority complex that all Europeans seemed to suffer from? Was the Catholic part the cause, or did it just happen to be? Or was the European part the cause, or did it just happen to be?

Your condemnation cannot be so simply given, because your assertions need a deeper understanding of the situation, an understanding that I doubt you have.


[quote name='RezaMikhaeil' timestamp='1332561786' post='2406915']
[color=#222222] Of course they did, many representatives of these indigenous communities wrote to them and did all that they could to stop it. Seriously, grow up and come join reality. If your child is being beaten by a priest on a daily basis, as a mother, you don't think that one would do whatever they could to stop it and protect their children? OF COURSE THEY DID!
[/quote]

The story of Bartolomé de las Casas, the Dominican, is the first concrete scenario that comes to mind when you so vaguely mention this widespread abuse. I think his history shows how much more complex such situations were in actuality. You pass judgement so easily, but know so little...



[quote name='RezaMikhaeil' timestamp='1332561786' post='2406915']
[color=#222222] Nobody said every Roman Catholic was guilty and evil. There is not a single sentence of mine where that point was made. However I did make the point that the institution is to be condemned for facilitating it. Huge difference but I don't expect you to know the difference. [/quote]

Well, I am part of the Church, and live my Faith. To condemn the Church is to condemn me. Sorry, I don't see the difference.

[quote name='RezaMikhaeil' timestamp='1332561891' post='2406917']Really? So I guess the problem was just that thousands and thousands of priests and nuns just didn't understand the doctrine as you so understand it? Pathetic response.
[/quote]

It it were otherwise, then one would not be able to live their faith and be Catholic without being evil. And you have condemned me, along with all Catholics.

[quote name='RezaMikhaeil' timestamp='1332561891' post='2406917']
It's not pointless
[/quote]

Then don't ignore the good.

[quote name='RezaMikhaeil' timestamp='1332561786' post='2406915']
[color=#222222] You should be ashamed for reducing global and systematic abuse to "a few bad guys". Sorry but it wasn't.
[/quote]

Again, you don't have all the facts.
I am very sorry about your grandfather. His is not a tale unique. It is not uniquely Catholic, either. It is an all too common story within humanity. You lose faith with the Roman Catholic Church, while I lose faith with humanity. That is what I meant when I was talking of shame. Do not narrow your focus for the sake of purely blaming the Church, and so ignore the plight of everyone else. When you turn it into a Catholic thing, you ignore the people who suffer from the human side of it.

[RezaMikhaeil]

[color=#222222][quote name='Tally Marx' timestamp='1332565659' post='2406937']
Over how long a period of time? How many priests were there total in the United States during this time? Was every priest accused truly guilty? Furthermore, the Catholic Church is made up of human beings, so to say that bad things happened is really a given; to say that it is bad/evil generally is to imply that it is beyond mere human fault. Therefore, you must provide similar information for other groups/institutions. Jenkins isn't Catholic; his assertions are logically sound and his information and sources are unbiased. You will never know if you do not read the book.[/quote]

If I read a book everytime someone said to do so, then I would be reading hundreds of books a day. You might say "he's not catholic and isn't bias" that doesn't prove nothing. As for your other point, you're downplaying it.

[quote]It proved the point quite well, thank you. A group of people were abused by another group/institution, yet that doesn't justify condemning the entire other group/institution.
If you want abuse on Catholics, specifically, by a religious group, specifically, again...look to England.[/quote] What Roman Catholics went through in England doesn't even come close to what indigenous people went through, sorry.



[quote]"A Great and Noble Scheme" by John Mack Faragher.
Where is the documented history of your people?[/quote] I shall give you several. "Seeds of Faith: Catholic Indian Boarding Schools" by James Carroll, Harvard Magazine [[url="http://harvardmagazine.com/2008/03/indian-boarding-schools"][color="#0000ff"]http://harvardmagazine.com/2008/03/indian-boarding-schools[/color][/url]], and one last one, the documentary "voices of the heart", which was shown on Al-Jazeera English's program "Witness", [url="http://www.aljazeera.com/programmes/witness/2009/07/200975111633133271.html"][color="#0000ff"]http://www.aljazeera.com/programmes/witness/2009/07/200975111633133271.html[/color][/url] I could list hundreds of books on this subject but it's irrelevant because it's still fresh in people's minds. You can go to these indigenous tribes and witness it for yourself, just like you can still go to Auschwitz and see where Jews were put into gas chambers if you don't believe that the holocaust was real.

[quote]In the United States child abuse cases, you clearly don't.
And if you are trying to say that every priest and nun molested every indigenous child in every country for a hundred years straight....you still clearly don't. It happening once is it happening far too often. But I still think your claim is greatly exaggated.[/quote] There is nothing exaggerated about what happened to native american children or aboriginees in these Roman Catholic boarding schools and how common they were. In the United States alone over 125,000 children were subjected to this sort of abuse.

[quote]Unless you can prove that every priest and nun molested every indigenous in every country for the entire time they were there, as you claim[/quote] I never made that claim. What claim I did make is that thousands of priests and nuns abused indigenous children in these boarding schools. This is not speculation, it's fact. I said that the physical abuse ranged from molestation, rape, physical beatings, and killing. I never said that everyone of them did all of those things. However if you watch the documentary that I'd posted above, you'll see that they interview several former teachers. Many of them admit to being abusive to the children but say that they thought it was right and not out of the ordinary with the school itself.

[quote]When people of other institutions (like public schools, or even governments) do it, they are not, in the public eye, teachers, homosexuals, or English who are doing such crimes. They are people who happen to be teachers, homosexuals, or English. But not so Catholics, for some reason. If you are to rule out the inherent fault of humanity and get a true picture of the Church, you would need to treat every single institution in the world as you do the Church. Else, you condemn the Catholic Church for merely being made up of human beings. Also, you would have to differentiate between correlation and causation. Were they abusing kids because they were Catholic priests, or because they were European and suffered from the superiority complex that all Europeans seemed to suffer from? Was the Catholic part the cause, or did it just happen to be? Or was the European part the cause, or did it just happen to be?[/quote]

Here is where you are incorrect. If there was a private school in which rampant molestation, rape, physical abuse and killings took place, you best believe that institution would be ridiculed by our society. It wouldn't just be a few teachers criticized, it would be the institution as a whole put through the ringer and rightfully so. When Oprah had sponsored a school in South Africa that had a small case of molestation, it became global news and people wanted to know what was going on there. So don't think that there is a double standard because there isn't. When several ACORN employees were found to have facilitated prostitution, it didn't matter what other community outreach programs that they did, what happened is that they faciliated prostitution and they were shut down.

[quote]Your condemnation cannot be so simply given, because your assertions need a deeper understanding of the situation, an understanding that I doubt you have.[/quote] I clearly have a much deeper understanding then you do. My family members were subjected to it and I have recognized it in it's entirety, you still live in denial.

[quote]The story of Bartolomé de las Casas, the Dominican, is the first concrete scenario that comes to mind when you so vaguely mention this widespread abuse. I think his history shows how much more complex such situations were in actuality. You pass judgement so easily, but know so little...[/quote]

Are you seriously comparing Las Casas with what happened to over 125,000 Native American children? First off, it's a completely different scenario and context, not to mention time period. Second many historians believe that he exaggerated the facts and more importantly he encouraged the Atlantic Slave Trade by - on numerous occasions - suggesting that indigenous slaves be replaced by African slaves. [/color]

[quote]Well, I am part of the Church, and live my Faith. To condemn the Church is to condemn me. Sorry, I don't see the difference.[/quote] That's because you're simple minded. I'd clearly said that it wasn't a condemnation of every Roman Catholic. Is condemning Joseph Smith, or the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints for racism, a condemnation of every practicing Mormon across the globe? Don't be so naive and immature.

[quote]It it were otherwise, then one would not be able to live their faith and be Catholic without being evil. And you have condemned me, along with all Catholics.[/quote] No I haven't, I condemned the systematic actions of an organization based upon it's historical track record, not all individuals of a particular religion. However if I had, it wouldn't be any different then the Roman Catholic condemning all Copts as "monophysites" and violently attacking them, which was a false accusation from the start.

[quote]Then don't ignore the good.[/quote] Nobody ignored the good but good deeds don't erase the bad ones.

[quote]Again, you don't have all the facts. I am very sorry about your grandfather. His is not a tale unique. It is not uniquely Catholic, either. It is an all too common story within humanity. You lose faith with the Roman Catholic Church, while I lose faith with humanity. That is what I meant when I was talking of shame. Do not narrow your focus for the sake of purely blaming the Church, and so ignore the plight of everyone else. When you turn it into a Catholic thing, you ignore the people who suffer from the human side of it.[/quote] I don't have all the facts? Well tell me of another religious group that conducted such a systematic and global abuse against indigenous people from nearly every continent in the world? Don't worry I'll wait...

How can you be "sorry" about what happened to my family, when you deny it happened on the massive scale that it did? That's like saying 6 million Jews didn't die during the Holocaust but then saying to a Jew, "I'm sorry for what your family went through". It didn't just happen to some indigenous people. These forced boarding schools happened in every indigeous community at the same time, under the same pretenses, for the same reason, with the same results and you're saying "it was just a few". That's a load of.............

If you want to know the truth. Go and talk to Aboringees that were sent to these schools, then native americans and follow that by talking to asians. It's completely the same and a policy that was conducted, not a few rogue priests and nuns.

[RezaMikhaeil]

[url="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=11YqiE_EWrA"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=11YqiE_EWrA[/url]

[Archaeology cat]

Reza, I am sorry for what happened to your family, and to the others. Such should not happen. My prayers are with you.

[RezaMikhaeil]

[quote name='Archaeology cat' timestamp='1332589041' post='2406978']
Reza, I am sorry for what happened to your family, and to the others. Such should not happen. My prayers are with you.
[/quote]

Not to be rude but I don't need an apology.Nor am I asking for one.

[Tally Marx]

[quote name='RezaMikhaeil' timestamp='1332574347' post='2406953'] That's because you're simple minded. I'd clearly said that it wasn't a condemnation of every Roman Catholic.
[/quote]

Really?  Let's recapitulate:

[quote name='Tally Marx' timestamp='1332557727' post='2406864']
The Church teaches good.  The doctrines are in themselves good.  That remains true no matter how many Catholics fail at obeying and living them.  The failure of others is not an excuse for us to fail.  "Do as they say, not as they do" is what Jesus said.

[quote name='RezaMikhaeil' timestamp='1332561891' post='2406917']
Really? So I guess the problem was just that thousands and thousands of priests and nuns just didn't understand the doctrine as you so understand it? Pathetic response.
[/quote]

[/quote]

Basically, then, the doctrines and teaching of the Roman Catholic Church are evil and so you condemn them....but the people who follow said doctrines faithfully aren't evil and you aren't condemning them?  I must admit that I do not see any sense in this.



[quote name='RezaMikhaeil' timestamp='1332574347' post='2406953']
If I read a book everytime someone said to do so, then I would be reading hundreds of books a day.
[/quote]

Step 1: demand source in scholarly fashion
Step 2: find an excuse not to read source
Step 3: pretend to continue an even handed debate and repeat

-----------------------------------------

Recap:
1) you claimed that the Catholic Church is unjust most of the time
2) I claimed that they are human faults, not Catholic faults

Let us address the first, first, shall we?

1A:

 [quote name='RezaMikhaeil' timestamp='1332574347' post='2406953']
As for your other point, you're downplaying it.
[/quote]

The info I requested is completely relevant; required, actually.
You said that 5,000 priests were involved in the sex scandals in the United States.  Assuming that number is correct, it still doesn't really tell us anything. How many priests were there total in the US during this period?  9,999?  That would mean more than half the priests were molesting children, and that would indeed prove your assertion.
But what if there were one million priests in the US during this period?
That would mean only .005% of priests were molesting children, and it would not prove your assertion.


 [quote name='RezaMikhaeil' timestamp='1332574347' post='2406953']
Nobody ignored the good but good deeds don't erase the bad ones.
[/quote]

I agree.  They do not.

But you said the Church is unjust most of the time".  "Most" assumes a fraction, and a fraction requires a larger whole.  This means that you must take into account both the good and the bad, and know what fraction the bad makes of the whole.  You haven't done that.  You have proven yourself very unwilling if not incapable of doing so.  Therefore, your assertion is automatically unfounded.

[RezaMikhaeil]

[quote name='Tally Marx' timestamp='1332635501' post='2407296']
Really? Let's recapitulate:[/quote] Please do...

[quote]Basically, then, the doctrines and teaching of the Roman Catholic Church are evil and so you condemn them....but the people who follow said doctrines faithfully aren't evil and you aren't condemning them? I must admit that I do not see any sense in this.[/quote] It's not that cut and dry. Allow me to break it down for you since you seem to be struggling. Do you believe that the teaching of Muhammad are righteous or not? I'm guessing probably not so would you say that a Muslim born into a Muslim home in Egypt, who is a peaceful person and does their best to follow the Islamic traditions for themselves but doesn't impose it on anyone else is bad? I'm guessing probably not but this doesn't mean that the teachings themselves are good or bad.

I have said this before, just because I believe that the Roman Catholic Church is a force for bad, not good - doesn't mean that I believe every genuine Catholic on the planet is bad. Did thousands and thousands of priests and nuns do those evil deeds while citing it as Roman Catholicism? Yes, so was I incorrect? No...

[quote]Step 1: demand source in scholarly fashion
Step 2: find an excuse not to read source
Step 3: pretend to continue an even handed debate and repeat[/quote] I'm afraid that you don't know how a debate works so let me break it down for you. When someone says to give citation, they aren't saying just name a book, any book. They are saying to name a book that you got that information from and reference from it with a direct citation. It's not complicated but if it is I'm sure that my 4th grade teacher could help you.

[quote]-----------------------------------------

Recap:
1) you claimed that the Catholic Church is unjust most of the time
2) I claimed that they are human faults, not Catholic faults[/quote]

Human faults of molesting, raping, beating and killing that affected over 100,000 Native American Children. Usually when I think of human faults, I think of possibly cursing at a child out of frustration or spanking a little bit too hard. Not physically beating them to the point that they are near death or end up dying. If that's your reasoning then I guess we should have not put Bundy to Death either.

[quote]Let us address the first, first, shall we?

1A:

The info I requested is completely relevant; required, actually.
You said that 5,000 priests were involved in the sex scandals in the United States. Assuming that number is correct, it still doesn't really tell us anything. How many priests were there total in the US during this period? 9,999? That would mean more than half the priests were molesting children, and that would indeed prove your assertion.
But what if there were one million priests in the US during this period?
That would mean only .005% of priests were molesting children, and it would not prove your assertion.[/quote] Unfortunately for you, I'd provided direct sources.

[quote]I agree. They do not.[/quote] Well your previous comment justified it as such. When I'd said that if we don't acknowledge history then we're doomed to repeat it you responded with, "then don't ignore the good", when you haven't even acknowledged the bad. Particularly when the bad does outweight the good. If you don't believe that the good erases the bad then stop behaving like you do.

[quote]But you said the Church is unjust most of the time". "Most" assumes a fraction, and a fraction requires a larger whole. This means that you must take into account both the good and the bad, and know what fraction the bad makes of the whole. You haven't done that. You have proven yourself very unwilling if not incapable of doing so. Therefore, your assertion is automatically unfounded.
[/quote]

It is unjust most of the time. It went from raping and physically abusing native americans to raping and physically abusing alter boys. There was no resting period inbetween. It went from spreading lies about the Coptic Church to killing them during the Crusades. It's been a continuous cycle of bad. Sure there has been some good but that doesn't outweigh the bad. IE: When the Catholic Church gave money to Uganda but then the Pope followed that which the lie that condoms were responsible for the spread of AIDS. A ridiculous comment without scientific basis that caused alot of harm.

[RezaMikhaeil]

[quote name='Tally Marx' timestamp='1332635501' post='2407296']Basically, then, the doctrines and teaching of the Roman Catholic Church are evil and so you condemn them....but the people who follow said doctrines faithfully aren't evil and you aren't condemning them? I must admit that I do not see any sense in this.[/quote]

Perhaps Stephen Fry can put it better then me in this debate: [url="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t-UR_mmMs2s"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t-UR_mmMs2s[/url] Skip to approx 3:34 and begin from there. Unless of course you want to hear the other speakers. In which please listen to the full debate.

[Tally Marx]

A2

[quote name='RezaMikhaeil' timestamp='1332639113' post='2407349']
It is unjust most of the time.
[/quote]

You have as yet failed to prove that.


[quote name='RezaMikhaeil' timestamp='1332639113' post='2407349']
It's been a continuous cycle of bad.
[/quote]

That tends to be the impression when all you focus upon is the bad.
But, if you truly looked, you would *also* see it as a continuous cycle of good.  You would see Mother Teresa, the Jews sheltered during the Holocaust, Padre Pio, the preserved translations of the Bible (which your friend Fry seems unable to comprehend), and the school system that nearly the entire world employs now.  You would see Damien of Moloki along with the preserved art during the Dark Ages.  You would see charity hospitals and free education.  You would see people educated in some of the oldest and best colleges throughout the world.  You would see people the world over clothed and fed.  You would see Don Bosco, and aid in the Pro-Life movement.  You would see efforts against slavery and war.  You would see prayers offered and graces earned, the Theology of the Body, and the corporal and spiritual works of mercy taught.  You and Fry say that the Church is a force for bad, based on your experience and the experience of those you know.  But there are just as many people who say that it is a force for good based on *their* experience and the experience of those they know.  The fact is, that the Church is made up of people.  And people are neither good nor bad, but both at the same time, and so, therefore, is the Church and its influence.  To say that the Church is a force for evil and is unjust most of the time is to argue that the majority of the people who make up said Church are evil and unjust most of the time.  And you can dress in fancy words your idea that you love the do-gooder Catholic, but it is still insulting, because you have condemned the majority of Catholics.  And you have still failed to prove that the Church is more unjust than it is just.

[quote name='RezaMikhaeil' timestamp='1332639113' post='2407349']Sure there has been some good but that doesn't outweigh the bad
[/quote]

Nor does the bad outweigh the good.

[quote name='RezaMikhaeil' timestamp='1332639113' post='2407349']
It went from raping and physically abusing native americans to raping and physically abusing alter boys. There was no resting period inbetween. 
[/quote]

There are about one billion people in the Roman Catholic Church.  You can't name any group that large which has gone any length of time without doing something bad.  Humanity has no resting period in between their good or their bad.  But to try to say they are therefore a force for bad is...unfair.


[quote name='RezaMikhaeil' timestamp='1332639113' post='2407349'] IE: When the Catholic Church gave money to Uganda but then the Pope followed that which the lie that condoms were responsible for the spread of AIDS. A ridiculous comment without scientific basis that caused alot of harm.
[/quote]

The truth of the Pope's statement is still up for debate even in the scientific community, as you have already been shown.

[Tally Marx]

B1

[quote name='RezaMikhaeil' timestamp='1332639113' post='2407349'] Human faults of molesting, raping, beating and killing that affected over 100,000 Native American Children. Usually when I think of human faults, I think of possibly cursing at a child out of frustration or spanking a little bit too hard
[/quote]

A human fault would be any action or fault that humanity as a whole is susceptible to.  A Catholic fault would be a fault that apparently only plagues Catholics.  I maintain that you are condemning the Church as a force for evil when there are numerous other groups who illustrate or have illustrated the same faults.  I maintain that you are mistaking human fault for Catholic fault.  The way to determine if my assertion is correct is to see if the Church is actually more susceptible to such faults, or if they are rather equally distributed throughout humanity.

Example 1: The "Pedophile Priest" problem.

"The most reliable source available is the Chicago study commissioned by Cardinal Bernardin...in the early 1990's.  A committee of experts examined the personnel files of all men who had been priests in the Archdiocese of Chicago between 1951 and 1991, or 2,252 individuals. The priests were not pre-selected in any way that made them either more or less likely to have engaged in misbehavior.... Between 1963 and 1991, fifty-seven of these priests had been the subject of allegations of sexual abuse, in addition to two visiting clerics. 

 The commission reviewed all charges, not by the standard of criminal cases, which insists on proof beyond a reasonable doubt, but on the civil criterion of the preponderance of evidence.  In addition, evidence was used that would not have been acceptable in a court of law, including hearsay testimony.  When there was doubt about a case, the commission decided to err on the side of the accuser rather than the priest involved.  By these standards, the charges in eighteen cases were judged not to involve sexual misconduct.  Removing these eighteen cases left valid charges against thirty-nine priests in the archdiocese and the two externs. [Julia Quinn Dempsey, John R. Gorman, John P. Madden, and Alphonse P. Spilly, "The Cardinal's Commission on Clerical Sexual Misconduct with Minors: Report to Joseph Cardinal Bernardin, Archbishop of Chicago" (Chicago: The Commission, 1992)

In short, 2.6 percent of Chicago's archdiocesan clergy were the subject of complaints, and charges against 1.7 percent of priests were probably true.  As the Cardinal's commission was under intense public pressure to examine the records thoroughly and frankly, we can be reasonable confident about the validity of the figures.  Some confirmation of this figure comes from more recent events in Philadelphia where, facing a comparable clamor for openness, the archdiocese released information on all the priests who had been the subject of "credible" abuse complaints in the previous half century.  The numb of offenders was 35, out of some 2,100 priests who had served in the archdiocese since 1950.  Again, this represents a proportion of around 1.7 percent. [Michael Rubinkam, "Phila. Diocese Finds Sex Abuse Cases," Associated Press, Feb. 22, 2002]  "
[Philip Jenkins, "Anti-Catholicism," Oxford University Press, 2003, p. 139]

"Every denomination and faith tradition has had its trial of disasters: in addition to Catholics, this nightmare has affected Protestants, Jews, Mormons, Jehovah's Witnesses, Buddhists, even Hare Krishna devotees.  A study of seventy-five priests and ministers convicted of criminal sex abuse between 1985 and 2002 found that thirty-eight were Catholic priests, while most of the rest were from Protestant denominations. [Mary Clayton and Seth Stern, "Clergy, Abuse, and Jail Time," Christian Science Monitor, March 21, 2002]" [Philip Jenkins, "A-C", p. 142]

One abusive priest is one too many.  However, there is nothing to suggest that the problem is more prevalent among Catholics.  It is not a Catholic problem, it is a human problem.  You are condemning the Church for being human.

[Laudate_Dominum]

Reza, meesa no likin' that debate. I've seen it before and found it to be lame sauce and sads. What thing in particular do you think is rad? The condoms claims? The overall rhetorical performance of Fry? Lay out the claims of fact and the arguments if you like. Debates like that are mostly show imho. Too many mind.

[RezaMikhaeil]

[quote name='Laudate_Dominum' timestamp='1332652180' post='2407746']
Reza, meesa no likin' that debate. I've seen it before and found it to be lame sauce and sads. What thing in particular do you think is rad? The condoms claims? The overall rhetorical performance of Fry? Lay out the claims of fact and the arguments if you like. Debates like that are mostly show imho. Too many mind.
[/quote]

Well my favorite comment is where Fry says that individual faith is sacrosanct...