[Saquist]

Originally Posted by TheTrekkie

It's the same problem with many religious organisation.
They misguide their people by equating their belief (God) with their organisation. Thus their memebers automatically do everything to protect their organisation.

However if you read the bible it must become quite clear that you can't find God in a building, an organisation or anything like that, but only inside yourself.

Unfortunatelly I haven't found any group, yet, who on the one hand rejects antiquated religious traditions (like having priests who stand above other believers) and on the other hand also negate their own importance as a group.
Often you only have the choice between strange religious traditions with a lot of hypocrisy and a huge power machine or non-denominational groups, who take themselves much too serious (probably because they have to separate themselves actively from the big churches to not become assimilated).

The God of the Bible would never condone this treatment for the sake of saving face. Instead of owning up to it or apologizing that easter speech was about making reply. It's a really bad organization religiously and legally, There is no way I'd leave my kids in their "care".

[Zardoz]

Originally Posted by Saquist

The God of the Bible would never condone this treatment for the sake of saving face. Instead of owning up to it or apologizing that easter speech was about making reply. It's a really bad organization religiously and legally, There is no way I'd leave my kids in their "care".

Agreed. But humans make themselves self important and try to make themselves into demi-gods. Corruption follows when humans put themselves before a religous message, or docterine

[horatio]

Originally Posted by Saquist

The God of the Bible would never condone this treatment for the sake of saving face. Instead of owning up to it or apologizing that easter speech was about making reply. It's a really bad organization religiously and legally, There is no way I'd leave my kids in their "care".

I have grown up in a Catholic environment and experienced nothing but warmth and love and I wouldn't hesitate one moment to send my kids into a Catholic kindergarten.
The problems of Rome are obvious and one cannot deny a potential connection between celibacy, sexual neuroses and sexual abuse ... but they hardly justify general Catholic bashing.
Jesus would never condone this "silly my church is better than your church" or "my religion is better than your religion" stuff.

[Saquist]

Originally Posted by Zardoz

Agreed. But humans make themselves self important and try to make themselves into demi-gods. Corruption follows when humans put themselves before a religous message, or docterine

...and that changes the message from benign to self interest.
What is it all for? They're supposed to be ministers. That means they impart assistance graciously. It should mean that as an organization that even in error you do what is right.

You know, it's the Catholic Church that gives religion a bad name. It's not just been here and now but for hundreds of years. They've done just the opposite of what Christ would have done, dominating man to his injury becoming steeped in politics, and compromising biblical principles, failing to follow the path of justice...

Every time I talk God I have to fight through the acts of the Catholic churchs who say they are working in behalf of God. Atheist treat all religions the same, throwing a blanket over all the organizations for that of one....so I don't mind calling out the biggest problem child in the play ground. Notice how this isn't stopping, Notice how people ...look the other way. That disgust me the most. Nothing will ever change when you're looking away from the problem

Originally Posted by horatio

I have grown up in a Catholic environment and experienced nothing but warmth and love and I wouldn't hesitate one moment to send my kids into a Catholic kindergarten.
The problems of Rome are obvious and one cannot deny a potential connection between celibacy, sexual neuroses and sexual abuse ... but they hardly justify general Catholic bashing.
Jesus would never condone this "silly my church is better than your church" or "my religion is better than your religion" stuff.

If the criticism is too harsh then look the other way, Horatio.
Look the other way as children are used for sexual purposes.
Make light of it as offenders are hidden from justice.
That too has become tradition.

[janeway72]

Originally Posted by horatio

I have grown up in a Catholic environment and experienced nothing but warmth and love and I wouldn't hesitate one moment to send my kids into a Catholic kindergarten.
The problems of Rome are obvious and one cannot deny a potential connection between celibacy, sexual neuroses and sexual abuse ... but they hardly justify general Catholic bashing.
Jesus would never condone this "silly my church is better than your church" or "my religion is better than your religion" stuff.

Agreed! Couldn't have put it better myself. Though I'm not as convinced as you are by the idea that celibacy drives people to sexual deviancy. I would, however, not discount the idea that people with those tendencies have often gone into the Church to avoid the issues,

I would also agree with what you said earlier that abuse happens in all society and the media just prefer this type of abuse as it makes better headlines.

I know loads of Catholics who would never condone abuse or the covering up of abuse. Christianity in all it's guises should be about loving God and loving your neighbour as yourself. Jesus said these are the two most important commandments.

[kevin]

All the rationalising in the world (headlines etc) still absolutely fails to make up for the systematic protection afforded to the guilty by said Church.

Of course it's horrible when anyone does it, of course it's also been covered up in other institutions and of course we all have a touch of faux moral outrage about us all - and of course the Church is a popular target for the media (it shouldn't be above any criticism anyway) but let's not forget it's culpability and it doesn't deserve a get out of jail card by way of diverting the attention back onto those who exposed it's behaviour in the first place.

It's in this mess because it protected the guilty across decades and all the diffusion in the world really doesn't change that.

[janeway72]

Originally Posted by kevin

All the rationalising in the world (headlines etc) still absolutely fails to make up for the systematic protection afforded to the guilty by said Church.

Of course it's horrible when anyone does it, of course it's also been covered up in other institutions and of course we all have a touch of faux moral outrage about us all - and of course the Church is a popular target for the media (it shouldn't be above any criticism anyway) but let's not forget it's culpability and it doesn't deserve a get out of jail card by way of diverting the attention back onto those who exposed it's behaviour in the first place.

It's in this mess because it protected the guilty across decades and all the diffusion in the world really doesn't change that.

I'm not in anyway defending the perpetrators or the hierarchy in the Church who covered up for the perpetrators, but the whole Church is not corrupt because of it. There are many in the Church who knew nothing of it and covered up nothing. However, those who committed the crimes and those who covered it up should be hung out dry.

I have to say that I take my hat off to the Archbishop who has exposed the covering up by the then Cardinal Ratzinger. That must have been hard and will cost him dearly if he had any plans to go higher in the Church but he has done the right thing. Though maybe it would have been better to mention it while Ratzinger was just a Cardinal.

[Saquist]

Originally Posted by janeway72

I'm not in anyway defending the perpetrators or the hierarchy in the Church who covered up for the perpetrators, but the whole Church is not corrupt because of it. There are many in the Church who knew nothing of it and covered up nothing. However, those who committed the crimes and those who covered it up should be hung out dry.

I have to say that I take my hat off to the Archbishop who has exposed the covering up by the then Cardinal Ratzinger. That must have been hard and will cost him dearly if he had any plans to go higher in the Church but he has done the right thing. Though maybe it would have been better to mention it while Ratzinger was just a Cardinal.

Doesn't that disturb you that doing the right thing in a Christian Organization is likely going to cost his plans in moving higher in the church..

Sounds like you've just isolated the problem in the organization.

[kevin]

Originally Posted by janeway72

I'm not in anyway defending the perpetrators or the hierarchy in the Church who covered up for the perpetrators, but the whole Church is not corrupt because of it. There are many in the Church who knew nothing of it and covered up nothing. However, those who committed the crimes and those who covered it up should be hung out dry.

I have to say that I take my hat off to the Archbishop who has exposed the covering up by the then Cardinal Ratzinger. That must have been hard and will cost him dearly if he had any plans to go higher in the Church but he has done the right thing. Though maybe it would have been better to mention it while Ratzinger was just a Cardinal.

And I think that as long as the guilty are seen to be brought to account then that will help the image restoration the Church needs.

Of course, several players are now deceased which makes it impossible now but I'm not sure everyone (both involved and the media) are of the opinion that's really happening.

[Enterprise Captain]

Originally Posted by Saquist

You know, it's the Catholic Church that gives religion a bad name.

Originally Posted by Saquist

Atheist treat all religions the same, throwing a blanket over all the organizations

As an (what do you call someone that believes God most likely doesn't exist but isn't willing to write he/she/it off with 100% certainty? Isn't that technically agnostic?) I disagree with both of these statements.