UH-OH!!!!http://www.handykult.de/plaudersmilies.de/uhoh.gif

Hey Rob, a couple of things you might want to know:

Here's a quote that gets forgotten alot

"When fearful martyrdom came to our people, the voice of the
pope was raised for its victims."

Golda Meir, Israeli Foreign Minister(October 1958) "

(Hint: she's praising Pope Pius XII in a eulogy)

Oh, and I am very familiar w/ Opus Dei--I'm a super-numerary and have good relationships with several residences. The information you posted above are nothing more than scandalous rumors. I know this for a FACT because I am directly involved with them.

Disagree as much as you like, but at least get the facts straight.

Can we un-hijak this thread please? Can the anti-Catholic bigotry take a break please?

:mad: :mad: :mad:

Listen nobody is Catholic bashing - the vatican is not immune from criticism. Since you like to throw a Golda Meir quote - how about throwing a quote in about the Church's role during the holocaust that it only recently apologized for and even then it was a nonspecific apology that were not even close to what could have been said.

The Vatican is a political body as well and just because it gets criticized you have made that into a Catholic-bashing scenario. When the Vatican starts righting its wrongs and throws criticisms equally against everyone including itself, then they can even start to say anything like this.

-Rudey

Actually, there has been Catholic bashing in this thread, Rudey.

So what. What was said that wasn't accurate?

I looked over the thread again instead of looking at my BMA swap rates and I'm confused as to what's considered Catholic bashing. Did what I say qualify for that because I criticized the Vatican?

The only other thing I can think of is max saying the whole priest/young boy thing which is a sad thing that American catholics have to deal with and it has brought shame to the church and will take time for the wounds to heal (parts of the expansive estate sold in Boston was moving in the right direction).

I would just like to know that Cream - because I consider what the Cardinal said to be American bashing then.

-Rudey

Let's try to get this back under control.

Sure - I think the Vatican has no right to judge.

-Rudey
--Under control.

Rudey, it was madmax's remark about Saddam being treated better than an altar boy on a camping trip. That's the Catholic bashing remark for me.

As for your remarks, I say that you could ask those questions of all religions and their leaders. The Catholic Church has been there in times of struggle and sorrow to help those less fortunate. The Catholic Church, through its various organizations, feeds, clothes, houses, employs, and educates millions of people worldwide. Over one billion people identify themselves as Roman Catholic. Personally, I don't have a problem with raising questions. I do have a problem with the hostile tone that this thread has taken regarding my faith.

Well I don't understand or see eye to eye on how that criticism is considered bashing but I do understand that you feel bothered by those remarks.

I think that the Church does have a lot to answer for. Yes so do some other religious institutions. Except the difference here is that the Catholic church is much more of a regimented and hierarchical org than any other religious institution (most aren't even in such a hierarchy) and also this thread has simply concentrated on a Cardinal's remarks for the Vatican.

The fact that it's so large, influential, and has such a long history lends itself to the idea that the Church has a lot to answer for. If you could find another religion which is so organized, is this influential, has commited atrocities in its past, and makes a remark about Saddam I guarantee people would post in there and criticize them.

-Rudey

Rudey, I deleted that post for a reason. I wish that you would do the same. I'm not going to post here again.

I wish someone would lock or delete this thread.

Sorry adduncan.....

I was posting based on personal experience dealing with both the students and staff at the residence; other observations were passed along to me by my great uncle (he's a Dominican monk outside of Chicago).

Look maybe it is only the residence here at UofT, but these are issues that I have talked about with the staff and students who were either rushing, had joined, or had brought complaints against the residence to the student council.

I brought it up as an example that the Church is a complicated political animal that has many different and sometimes contradictory views.

For you, anything.

-Rudey
--I have an intern everyone!!! (Like a real one...not like joking around about a girl)

OF COURSE the Vatican is going to weigh in on political debates! Its worldwide influence is so broad and has been in existence for such a long time that world political events impact the Church probably more so than any other distinct religious body. The United States is possibly the only major Western nation that doesn't have a Catholic heritage or was impacted by the Church during its early history--so Americans might have a bigger problem with what the Vatican says than say, Spain or England.

And that's okay. I have nothing against Catholicism or any organized religion's commentary on political events. It's when religious groups try to impact MY PERSONAL politics that things get dirty.

Maybe, some to the over zealous religious zeaolitnesss may be better off reading the History of the Old European Countrys!

Rudey is fundamentally correct! It was not the church as is known today as it was then!

The Roman Catholic Church was as big in the Realm of a Country as the King!

You want to talk that sh*t, lets go!

Henery The VIII, and the foundation of the Church of England! Well for one. Thomas o Beckett for another, how often did there be two popes in catholic History? Notice the small "c"!

Check out the dictionary and see what is says about catholic.;)

A man has the fundimental sex drives, growing up, I thouht the catholic Priest were doing the Nuns, Nope the Alter Boys!:(

Rudey, I go with you on this one!:D


Sadamnit treated like a cow, hell, he should have been treated like the PIG That He Is!:mad:

Tom, any respect, patience, or benefit of the doubt I ever had for you just died.

It's really time for you to stop putting your foot in your mouth and spouting half truths and half thoughts. You really are a bigot.

:(

WOW, A History Major here:confused:

Excuse me would you in your self piousness please explain!:confused:

Bigot? Dah, BS!

Go for it oh ye of Font Of Knowledge!:)

Get off your feet and on your rear!

Really looking forward to your rebutil if you can get past 1968!

you know before then!

actually the Black Shism did happen, and so did most of the stuff he said (minus the altar boy remark)


If anyone woukld read the back ground of the Catholic Church would be shocked.

From having women as priest (we did for a long time)
To preist being married with children (when have about 20 priest now in the US that are)
to the Crusades (have you read about the Children Crusade, where half of West Europe lost its children becuase they thought they could do a better job)
To buying the Heaven"s Ring (can't remeber offical term, but is where a very rich man would pay alott of $$$$$ and get a coin or ring that would gain him automatic entry to heaven once he died. No matter his sins)



But I am Catholic, I believe in God and Jesus. IF I would change my religion becuase of what some sexist pope did 1500 years ago then I would be changing my religion every week.


Christia

OK, hold on right there.

I am a European history major at a school that is top-ranked in history. My advisor is a noted scholar on intellectual and ecclesiastical history, specializing in the fall of the Roman Empire up through the Reformation. Now, he's taught me a thing or two---and what you're saying is not correct.

If anyone wants to listen to me give some lengthy diatribes about Nicolaism, simony, the sale of indulgences, the Great Schism, the Avignon papacy, and the Babylonian captivity, baby, I'm ready. But I don't think anyone wants me to.

Just rest assured that what you wrote is 80% historically inaccurate.

And another note--what happened historically in the Roman Catholic church has little to no relevance for the Roman Catholic church today. The papacy of the late middle ages and Renaissance, was, to put it mildly, insanely corrupt. The church today may have its issues but it's not some evil institution BY ANY MEANS.

soooo..... everyone calm down! :)

Christia (and Tom....)

Last post on the subject.

Everything you posted is the populist "Cliffs Notes" version. (And by the way I was a history minor FWIW.)

You can both egg me on and demand more detail but the fact is the details take up a library full of books and both of you know they don't fit in a sound bite or in a post on GC. That does not mean your quips "win" an argument or are even correct.

As for the Crusades, which is a popular bashing topic, I would recommend Sir Steven Runciman's "A History of the Crusades" (a work in 3 volumes) which is considered the seminal work on the topic. He does not share your conclusion on the Childrens' Crusade. His books are a relatively easy read for a scholarly work. No, I will not reproduce it here for your satisfaction. Check out Amazon.com

The "Heaven's Ring" you refer to would take about 10 pages to explain - and was addressed and resolved in the Council of Trent. You can read it in its entirety (and in English) here: http://history.hanover.edu/texts/trent.html

Female priests - never. You're thinking of a gnostic splinter group. Not the same thing, even as early as the writing of the Gospel of John.

Married priests - no kidding that used to be the norm. And the problems caused by that situation is what led to the Western church (Latin rite) banning it. In addition, some entered the priesthood or religious life after their spouses died. So of COURSE they had children!
The Eastern Rites however, do allow married clergy with very specific and rigid stipulations. It's not like Protestant ministers being married. (Some Eastern rites reunited with Rome recently.) Also, when Episopalian or other ministers convert to Catholicism, they are ordained under the Eastern rite if they are married. There's much more than 20.

"Black" schism? Can you clarify? There were several "schisms", some major, some relatively minor, and there's more going on today. If you're thinking of the Church of England split, you can set the blame on Henry Tudor the 8th - he wanted to bend the church to fit HIS opinion. T'ain't how it works. You can't blame the Pope for that one.

More than one Pope? Yes, happened too. Disputes among Church leadership happen, like in any org. You want to talk about two ancient Church leaders in a spat, check out Peter and Paul. So what? The same thing happens in every other damn religious organization on the planet. It just doesn't make CNN.

I've read the background of the Catholic church. It's the reason I converted to it in college--because I wouldn't accept the small-minded, revisionist history that is so popular in the media and on message boards like this. The only thing that "shocks" me is Catholic self-hatred and ignorance. It's just plain sad. We don't have to accept what non-Catholics say about us, folks.

Tom--it was nice knowing you while it lasted. :(
Christia--good for you for hanging in there--there's a lot more to read out there than you have found so far and I hope the above references are a good start.

Edited to correct the Hanover University URL

If you don't have to accept what non-catholics say about you then why are you arguing on here? And who said something about you? The Vatican chose to say something about the US, and US citizens chose to return criticism towards the Vatican.

You've made the Vatican completely pure and innocent. On top of that nobody that isn't Catholic can make a criticism. Any other conditions you want to add to this? On top of that, you've thrown out comments about revisionist history and made it apply to any and all cricisms of the Vatican.

The reason why the Vatican is being discussed is because the Vatican made this remark. If it was the governing body for Anglicans, then Anglicans would be discussed. Also the Vatican is a much more hierarchical organization - most other religions are NOT. Now I can go on and on about the "sins" of the Vatican (I'm sure you'd consider it revisionist history even if it affected people that weren't Catholic) - but I'd just rather the Vatican stay quiet on all matters like this or start becoming more balanced and less political, spreading criticism more fairly including upon itself and the roles it took within even the last 50 years that have gotten it into hot water.

-Rudey
--America is always being bashed through revisionist history...

hold up, I am Roman Catholic. I went to St. Francis Xavier Elem. School then to St. Mary's High School. I was confirmed at St. Francis Xavier Parish when I was 18. I cried at my confirmation. It was wonderfull. Now my next goal is to marry a Catholic so I can get married in the Church.


Most of my information came From Dr. Camille, who has a PhD, Dr. Camile is also known as Sr. Loiuse. She is a wonderful little noun. Who I love very dearly.

It also came from Fr. Rousse, Fr. Cattahane (sp) and Bishop O'Brien (the Bishop that ran the guy over in PhX last summer)

I had this wonderfull news article From CNN about a Catholic Preist being married, I can't find it so I will tell you about it. This man got married and had kids, he then became a priest for a Methodist (i think, don't get mad If I am wrong) and wanted to be one for the Catholic Church. So he petitioned to the Pope who after a couple years agree inder certain terms.

1) he may never get divourced/annulled
2) If his wife dies, he may never get remarried
3) He may not use church funds to take care of his kids
4) the local parish must approve

When I find that link I will PM it to you.



about the women preist, yes there was some. In the very begining. Their reason of being was that men and women did not touch in every day life. ( as many of the history majors should know, it was not done) So the women priest (who did every thing a male priest did ) would be the one to help a women every day life. They has this practice for about 200 years, maybe less. But there were woman preist. I believe at Vatican 3 there will be again, hopefully before I die.


I have read most Sir Steven Runciman's "A History of the Crusades" thank you very much. It was very well written and gave me some great ideas and thoughts. But I simplefied it so some one who did not know much would understand. I am sorry if my over simplication to offend you.

The black Shism was the shism were we had two popes who fault for power many many years. That is its offical name.


as I said I could not remeber was that ring/ coin was offically called. I have heard many names for them. As I said I tend to over simplefy things. AS you said that subject would take about 10 pages to talk about.


If some one read my very last line that I said I picked this faith on my own accord, no matter the history. But what I wrote was to prove that we (hence I am in this "we" part too) had a religion that ruled an Empire, and had a very rocky start. That we are govern by "man" and therefore have faults. We are not perfect, nor is our church. But people here kept trying to say that the church has made no mistakes.





You may believe what ever you beleive. The only thing I am wrong of is over simplfying, I tend to do that alot. I am also glad that you picked the Catholic Chrurch, to me and for me ( no bashing me on this please) it was/is the best choice of faiths for me.

The Pope did not make the statement. The Pope, NOT THE CARDINAL, is the head of our Church. People close to him have said his strength does not allow him more than showing up and perhaps reciting a few prayers that have been repeated through the years. That about covers that.

The Cardinal made a statement of opinion...NOT doctrine. The problem is when anyone speaks FROM the Vatican, they are seen as speaking FOR the Vatican. I do not for one minute agree with his statement and believe he was wrong to put it out there without clarification.

Dragging historical wrongdoings into THIS discussion is uncalled for.

Yes, I do agree some of the BS flying around FEELS like "bashing".

One simple question...
I feel rather certain that there are one or two other threads where Catholics get bathed in criticism. Has this ever occurred where the table are turned on the Jewish Faith? I would like a link if someone could provide it. Maybe there was some debate over Israel and the Palestinians a while ago.

I do not understand such ill will towards my faith. it's one thing to
disagree. It's quite another to vehemently spout off things that are irrelevant to the Church of today.

My husband's family is not too fond of Jewish people period. They have opinions on a few of the other Christian faiths as well.(My husband NOT included) I could shovel some BS right back at "ya"
that would be accurate on some level, but not in totality. Yet, tit for tat does not improve understanding or communication. I can honestly say that on GC, I haven't seen too many Catholics go for the jugular with such vengeance. What, IS it? No one is holding a gun to anyones head and saying you have to join the "club".

You would think everyone would love us! Think how much we spur the economy and line those retailers pockets at Christmas time... think about that and you might see the underlying inference-then tell me how it feels.

your right Justamom. I am sorry. I will refrain from posting anymore on this thread becuase it is a touchy subject.


I am sorry to any one that I offended.


Christia

RB- I'm kind of sorry I posted on this thread too.

So ditto RB's comment.

I am way out of my depth when commenting on the Catholic Church, but I've been waiting since the beginning of all of this acrimony for someone to point that out.

What did Judaism have to do with this??

A) The Prime Minister of Israel did not go to the media and make a remark against US treatment of Saddam Hussein.

B) Even if the PM were to do that, he represents nobody but the nation of Israel which is composed of Jews, Muslim, Christians, Buddhists, Atheists, and more.

C) Judaism does not have a singular power structure. Many branches have developed over the years and there is no kind of body to control them. There is a Chief-Rabbi of Israel but that is sorta ambiguous as there are Chief Rabbis in a lot of places for several denominations. There is also a Chief Rabbi for the areas of Judae and Samaria.

D) Judaism is a religion. Catholicism is a religion. Catholicism (the religion) was not commented on but the Vatican (the controlling body with political history) was. Would you happen to know what the political body for Judaic religion (see bullet C) is so we can discuss that?

E) The Vatican is not without its sins and is not off limits. Should anyone that makes a comment on the Vatican be considered as insulting your faith?

F) Why is it wrong to bring historical wrongdoings into this? Are there not character judgements made daily from jounalism, business dealings, and court rooms? The Vatican has a lot to answer for. Should someone of such high stature within the Vatican say something about Saddam and not about other things including things in his own church, it sound not only hypocritical but also tarnishes their image.

I couldn't care how your husband's family or he feels towards Jews. Do you know why? Because for hundreds of years through progroms, inquisitions, the holocaust we've been hated and kicked around. We've been in ovens, felt the tips of cold steel-toed boots, and more and we're still here and we're still prosperous. Antisemitism has peaked globally to levels unexperienced for years now. But at the end of the day, none of us will sit there and take it. In areas of religion, philosophy, science, medicine, finance, business, entertainment, and now global security Jews have been groundbreakers. We're not just a religion but a people - different from any other religion. There is no comparison. Those that sit there hating us are the ones that fall behind - they are the errors of the world that end up disgusting the future generations.

-Rudey
--And I do love Catholics.