Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints

[UGAalum94]

Originally Posted by EE-BO

There is some conjecture there, but I base it in large part on the literature of Spain during the Medievel and Renaissance periods. Just about every major work that survived takes on the church in some way. And many books, like Lazarillo de Tormes, are full of tales of church abuse of the citizenry sexually.

Then of course there are all the works the Chuch banned and destroyed. There are many partial texts out there that tell far more chilling tales- one a partial story about a female heroine who went from town to town and cut off the sexual organs of priests who took her in and tried to molest her.

The sheer importance of Church misdoings throughout the entirety of Spanish Literature of that time is a very telling and frightening thing.

But again, I do not equate that with today. It was not Catholicism itself that was evil- but rather the fact that the Church then wielded such a great power in Europe.

It is the component of power and economic influence that creates the temptation and the trouble.

And this is important because it separates the religion itself from the actions of the power structure of the Church. To an extent, parishoners who support such a church are tied to its actions- but that is still a far cry from all Mormons or all Catholics of 500 years ago being monsters.

"Some conjecture" may be the understatement of a lifetime.

The parishioners are only tied to its actions if the parishioners are aware or should be aware of the abuse taking place or have some power or means to stop it. I'm not sure either the Mormons of today or the Catholics of history would meet that standard.

Are you aware that sometimes the things in books aren't real? Just asking.

ETA: I'm, of course, not saying that the Catholic Church historically wasn't corrupt. I just think you have to acknowledge that any entity as powerful as it was would face exaggeration of its faults.

[EE-BO]

Originally Posted by UGAalum94

"Some conjecture" may be the understatement of a lifetime.

The parishioners are only tied to its actions if the parishioners are aware or should be aware of the abuse taking place or have some power or means to stop it. I'm not sure either the Mormons of today or the Catholics of history would meet that standard.

Are you aware that sometimes the things in books aren't real? Just asking.

ETA: I'm, of course, not saying that the Catholic Church historically wasn't corrupt. I just think you have to acknowledge that any entity as powerful as it was would face exaggeration of its faults.

This is not a matter of "sometimes the things in books aren't real". This is a matter of two ENTIRE eras of literature being heavily dominated by a specific theme.

I don't want to brag, but I have read almost every major Spanish work of Literature covering 3 centuries- and a good bit of the most highly regarded work of the last 200 years. We are talking over 100 novels and many times more that number of poems, short stories and partially surviving excerpts of books that were banned and destroyed by the Inquisition. I know that may not translate into a "fact sheet" by modern standards- but it is all we have, and I have done the work and rendered informed judgements.

As for your final comment- that is entirely the point I was making. The Catholic Church was, for a long time, THE most powerful entity in Europe at a time when Europe was the center of the human world.

It is inevitable that an entity which had enormous wealth and the power endowed by religious belief would be so potent that its leaders would be ripe for unchecked corruption. It is all the more so because Europe at that time was totally class-driven. The priesthood was the ONLY possible way for people born into the lower and middle classes to attain the same degree of power and security as the nobility. So to become a priest was many people's ONLY choice for wealth and prestige. That is precisely the kind of environment that breeds corruption and the "blue wall" mentality.

But if you want facts, I can give you facts. There is a wide body of documented evidence of the Inquisitions torture techniques, what triggered their interest in people and the trail of blood they left behind.

And in 1492, when Columbus was "discovering" America- Spain expelled the Sephardic Jews from their country. Maybe that was not quite as bad as what the Nazi's did since the Spaniards did not kill their Jews- but they rounded them up and threw them out for no other reason than they were Jews and Ferdinand & Isabella had been convinced that religious purity (Catholic purity) was the key to Spain's continued endurance as a great nation. It is the same kind of racist attitude that drove the Nazi's, the KKK and other luminous organizations whose legacy is pretty clear.

There is plenty of factual evidence out there to suggest what a horror the Catholic Church inflicted on the world during that time. I don't know what more to say than that. It is a major factor in how the world is today.

[UGAalum94]

Originally Posted by EE-BO

This is not a matter of "sometimes the things in books aren't real". This is a matter of two ENTIRE eras of literature being heavily dominated by a specific theme.

I don't want to brag, but I have read almost every major Spanish work of Literature covering 3 centuries- and a good bit of the most highly regarded work of the last 200 years. We are talking over 100 novels and many times more that number of poems, short stories and partially surviving excerpts of books that were banned and destroyed by the Inquisition. I know that may not translate into a "fact sheet" by modern standards- but it is all we have, and I have done the work and rendered informed judgements.

As for your final comment- that is entirely the point I was making. The Catholic Church was, for a long time, THE most powerful entity in Europe at a time when Europe was the center of the human world.

It is inevitable that an entity which had enormous wealth and the power endowed by religious belief would be so potent that its leaders would be ripe for unchecked corruption. It is all the more so because Europe at that time was totally class-driven. The priesthood was the ONLY possible way for people born into the lower and middle classes to attain the same degree of power and security as the nobility. So to become a priest was many people's ONLY choice for wealth and prestige. That is precisely the kind of environment that breeds corruption and the "blue wall" mentality.

But if you want facts, I can give you facts. There is a wide body of documented evidence of the Inquisitions torture techniques, what triggered their interest in people and the trail of blood they left behind.

And in 1492, when Columbus was "discovering" America- Spain expelled the Sephardic Jews from their country. Maybe that was not quite as bad as what the Nazi's did since the Spaniards did not kill their Jews- but they rounded them up and threw them out for no other reason than they were Jews and Ferdinand & Isabella had been convinced that religious purity (Catholic purity) was the key to Spain's continued endurance as a great nation. It is the same kind of racist attitude that drove the Nazi's, the KKK and other luminous organizations whose legacy is pretty clear.

There is plenty of factual evidence out there to suggest what a horror the Catholic Church inflicted on the world during that time. I don't know what more to say than that. It is a major factor in how the world is today.

Right, but if you remember, your claim was the "biggest child molestation ring in history" if I remember correctly which doesn't seem to be what you are addressing here.

If you had said that the Catholic Church was a corrupt institution or that the Inquisition was really bad back in the day, I wouldn't have questioned you. You've shifted your claim a great deal.

[jon1856]

Affidavit: Report of child brides led to raid

SAN ANGELO, Texas (CNN) -- Tipped that girls as young as 13 were being forced to enter "spiritual marriages," have sex and bear children, Texas officials raided an isolated polygamist retreat in West Texas, according to court documents released Tuesday.

The information came from a 16-year-old girl who called a family violence hot line March 29, "expressing the need to leave her current living situation," according to the affidavit.
The teen bride said she was in an abusive "spiritual" marriage to an older sect member, the documents stated. She reported that she was the man's seventh wife and had been beaten and choked.
She said she had been hospitalized in the past with cracked ribs and hoped to escape the abuse by faking a medical condition.
http://www.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/04/08/...nch/index.html

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,348148,00.html

[EE-BO]

Originally Posted by UGAalum94

Right, but if you remember, your claim was the "biggest child molestation ring in history" if I remember correctly which doesn't seem to be what you are addressing here.

If you had said that the Catholic Church was a corrupt institution or that the Inquisition was really bad back in the day, I wouldn't have questioned you. You've shifted your claim a great deal.

The anecdotal and historical evidence is driven heavily by reports and accounts of pedophilia and rape of women.

More recently, how about Cardinal Bernard Law who was knowingly transferring a repeatedly complained about pedophilic priest who had attacked many children. It was known the guy was messing with kids, and Law just kept moving him around.

How about the fact the Pope pulled him over to Europe and gave him a PROMOTION when Law had to get out of the US or face the ire of American Catholics?

How are Law and our last Pope NOT somehow guilty for the facilitation of child molestation on this score alone?

If something like that can happen today, then it is no stretch to take all the evidence of times past and put together the pieces.

[RACooper]

Originally Posted by EE-BO

The anecdotal and historical evidence is driven heavily by reports and accounts of pedophilia and rape of women.

Please cite credible or respected academic sources (note this doesn't include Communist Convent/Monastery fantasy novellas) that back up this claim - both Catholic and non-Catholic sources would be nice.

More recently, how about Cardinal Bernard Law who was knowingly transferring a repeatedly complained about pedophilic priest who had attacked many children. It was known the guy was messing with kids, and Law just kept moving him around.

So singular cases and people prove a centuries long conspiracy? Citing singular sources in furtherance of a argument showing systemic abuse wouldn't net you a passing grade in most schools...

How about the fact the Pope pulled him over to Europe and gave him a PROMOTION when Law had to get out of the US or face the ire of American Catholics?

Because the Pope exercised his prerogative under Canon Law to deal with the Cardinal "in-house"... and promotion doesn't always equal advancement or reward - particularlly if said promotion is effectively an exile.

How are Law and our last Pope NOT somehow guilty for the facilitation of child molestation on this score alone?

Because again the exception doesn't prove the rule, no matter how much you wish it did - was Law a moron in trying to play the protector of the Church's rep? Yes. Did he make a colossal mistake in not treating the complaints credibly? Yes. Did he err in accepting the offender's repentance as credible, and forgiving them? Maybe...

But this hardly the image of the Cardinal and Pope sitting down and figuring out how to facilitate the abuse of children that you imply.

If something like that can happen today, then it is no stretch to take all the evidence of times past and put together the pieces.

Yes it is a stretch jackass because disconnected singular incidents doesn't make a vast connected conspiracy of systemic child abuse...

[UGAalum94]

Originally Posted by RACooper

Please cite credible or respected academic sources (note this doesn't include Communist Convent/Monastery fantasy novellas) that back up this claim - both Catholic and non-Catholic sources would be nice.



So singular cases and people prove a centuries long conspiracy? Citing singular sources in furtherance of a argument showing systemic abuse wouldn't net you a passing grade in most schools...



Because the Pope exercised his prerogative under Canon Law to deal with the Cardinal "in-house"... and promotion doesn't always equal advancement or reward - particularlly if said promotion is effectively an exile.



Because again the exception doesn't prove the rule, no matter how much you wish it did - was Law a moron in trying to play the protector of the Church's rep? Yes. Did he make a colossal mistake in not treating the complaints credibly? Yes. Did he err in accepting the offender's repentance as credible, and forgiving them? Maybe...

But this hardly the image of the Cardinal and Pope sitting down and figuring out how to facilitate the abuse of children that you imply.



Yes it is a stretch jackass because disconnected singular incidents doesn't make a vast connected conspiracy of systemic child abuse...

Yep. Unless you're Jack Chick.

[EE-BO]

Originally Posted by RACooper

Please cite credible or respected academic sources (note this doesn't include Communist Convent/Monastery fantasy novellas) that back up this claim - both Catholic and non-Catholic sources would be nice.

Well, why don't you prove to me that the long list of books I have read were not written by communists? As quick as you are to dismiss my positions, you don't really need the list of actual books to do that do you?

Do you deny that Spain, under the regime of Ferdinand and Isabella who were wholly enamored of the Catholic Church, expelled Jews and tortured its own citizens to achieve a stronger empire in the name of religion? Are you a Holocaust denier too?

I am sorry, but I am not going to give you a bibliography of over a decade's study. If you want to get educated- go out and start reading for yourself. I am not vilifying every person who was ever a Catholic, but merely talking about the corruption that evolved when the Church became a major world power.

Is it so hard for you to imagine that? Have you ever heard of the Taliban? Does the existence of the Taliban prove the Muslim religion to be inherently corrupt? Of course not. It merely proves yet again that religion used as a political and economic influence can have horrific results.

Originally Posted by RACooper

So singular cases and people prove a centuries long conspiracy? Citing singular sources in furtherance of a argument showing systemic abuse wouldn't net you a passing grade in most schools...

I am giving you just one cited example- and it is a pretty damn big one. How would you feel if your kid got a blow job from a Priest and you found out later that your Cardinal had moved the guy to your congregation after he was accused of doing the same elsewhere? Or are you one of those guys who would tell your kid to just keep quiet and not make waves?

Originally Posted by RACooper

Because the Pope exercised his prerogative under Canon Law to deal with the Cardinal "in-house"... and promotion doesn't always equal advancement or reward - particularlly if said promotion is effectively an exile.

Give me a break. We are talking about the molestation of children- not some guy taking money from petty cash. You are not denying the facts I presented on this issue. Does that mean you accept and support Law's and the Pope's decision on this matter?

Originally Posted by RACooper

Because again the exception doesn't prove the rule, no matter how much you wish it did - was Law a moron in trying to play the protector of the Church's rep? Yes. Did he make a colossal mistake in not treating the complaints credibly? Yes. Did he err in accepting the offender's repentance as credible, and forgiving them? Maybe...

But this hardly the image of the Cardinal and Pope sitting down and figuring out how to facilitate the abuse of children that you imply.

You need to get educated on legal matters as well it seems. You don't have to sit down and premeditate child abuse to be morally culpable. Merely knowing about it and failing to act while it is ongoing is enough- in a legal sense as well as a moral sense. If you don't understand that, then I really have no reason to waste time trying to convince you.

Originally Posted by RACooper

Yes it is a stretch jackass because disconnected singular incidents doesn't make a vast connected conspiracy of systemic child abuse...

Disconnected singular incidents? Amazing...

I don't see what all the hang-up about this is. I am not condemning all Catholics- but rather some very serious issues in the governmental structure of the church.

Find me a significant body of work exposing a systemic sexual abuse of children by Baptists, Jews, Episcopalians, Muslims, Presbyterians, Lutherans, Buddhists, Zoroastrians (gotta throw that one in for a buddy of mine) or ANY other major religion in world history and then we can talk.

[PeppyGPhiB]

Originally Posted by EE-BO

Well, why don't you prove to me that the long list of books I have read were not written by communists? As quick as you are to dismiss my positions, you don't really need the list of actual books to do that do you?

Do you deny that Spain, under the regime of Ferdinand and Isabella who were wholly enamored of the Catholic Church, expelled Jews and tortured its own citizens to achieve a stronger empire in the name of religion? Are you a Holocaust denier too?

I am sorry, but I am not going to give you a bibliography of over a decade's study. If you want to get educated- go out and start reading for yourself. I am not vilifying every person who was ever a Catholic, but merely talking about the corruption that evolved when the Church became a major world power.

I'm not sure why you're focusing in on the Catholic church. There are plenty of other examples of murder and cruelty in (non-Catholic) Christianity. The Puritans had their witch trials, and the English had their burning-at-the-stake alternately in the name of Catholicism and Protestantism. The Church of England (now in the same body as Anglicans and Episcopalians) was essentially created by Henry VIII so he could divorce his wife and marry Anne Boleyn, who he beheaded later anyway with encouragement of the Church. Lots of executions and bad stuff in the name of religion, and not even close to always being Catholic.

[RACooper]

Originally Posted by EE-BO

Find me a significant body of work exposing a systemic sexual abuse of children by Baptists, Jews, Episcopalians, Muslims, Presbyterians, Lutherans, Buddhists, Zoroastrians (gotta throw that one in for a buddy of mine) or ANY other major religion in world history and then we can talk.

Careful your bigotry is showing... or rampant anti-Catholicism if you really want to be picky.

Perhaps before tossing out the old "educate yourself" bit (particular about Mediæval stuff - me being a Mediæval scholar and all) you might want to do so yourself... and so to help you in your education I'd suggest you should look into "Residential Schools" if you want to look into systemic child abuse.

[UGAalum94]

Originally Posted by EE-BO

You need to get educated on legal matters as well it seems. You don't have to sit down and premeditate child abuse to be morally culpable. Merely knowing about it and failing to act while it is ongoing is enough- in a legal sense as well as a moral sense. If you don't understand that, then I really have no reason to waste time trying to convince you.

I don't think anyone is trying to justify the Church's terrible reaction to the issue of sexual abuse by priests. But calling it history's greatest child molestation RING (not to mention the 200+ years ago part, which you never seem to have gotten back to) goes a bit far.

I don't think I've seen a single claim that the movement of priest from parish to parish was made to actually facilitate abuse, which is what would have to have been present to have a child abuse ring, don't you think?

(I certainly agree with you that in some cases the movement of priest had the effect of supplying a whole new set of victims, but I don't think the people making the moves in most cases had any such intent or knowledge.)

And, as unfortunate as it may be, I think you're wrong about the legal responsibility to report abuse. There are certain occupations that are mandatory reporters of abuse, but I don't know if the average person, as unfortunate as it might seem, is actually legally required. This may be something that we should try to change so that cases are less likely to be hidden without investigation.

[RACooper]

Originally Posted by EE-BO

I never said any such thing, and you know it. This is just the kind of comment that makes debating with you utterly useless.

Ahem...

Originally Posted by EE-BO

Find me a significant body of work exposing a systemic sexual abuse of children by Baptists, Jews, Episcopalians, Muslims, Presbyterians, Lutherans, Buddhists, Zoroastrians (gotta throw that one in for a buddy of mine) or ANY other major religion in world history and then we can talk.

[UGAalum94]

Originally Posted by EE-BO

The anecdotal and historical evidence is driven heavily by reports and accounts of pedophilia and rape of women.

More recently, how about Cardinal Bernard Law who was knowingly transferring a repeatedly complained about pedophilic priest who had attacked many children. It was known the guy was messing with kids, and Law just kept moving him around.

How about the fact the Pope pulled him over to Europe and gave him a PROMOTION when Law had to get out of the US or face the ire of American Catholics?

How are Law and our last Pope NOT somehow guilty for the facilitation of child molestation on this score alone?

If something like that can happen today, then it is no stretch to take all the evidence of times past and put together the pieces.

I'm still not buying "one of the biggest pedophile rings in history." Again, you've switched topics from what you asserted which wasn't about the 20th century scandal. Because it's possible for something to have happened doesn't mean that it did in fact happen historically.

[RACooper]

Originally Posted by UGAalum94

Right, but if you remember, your claim was the "biggest child molestation ring in history" if I remember correctly which doesn't seem to be what you are addressing here.

If you had said that the Catholic Church was a corrupt institution or that the Inquisition was really bad back in the day, I wouldn't have questioned you. You've shifted your claim a great deal.

Just accept the fact that EE-BO happily bought into the anti-Church and anti-Catholic genre of literature that arose amongst the "leftist" elements of Spanish society over the last century and a bit - and while some of the complaints are justified, it doesn't make the literature any more credible in an analysis of history and society... just good fiction.

EE-BO has basically focused on the most anti-Church/Catholic elements that appealed to the pre-existing or desired "academic" result that sees EE-BO's beliefs validated - of course that means that pesky things like reality or critical thought get lost in the pursuit of "proof" of "teh evilz Catholics".

Just do what I do, talk just enough to the person to realize that they aren't legitimate critics but anti-Catholic bigots and move on...