The priests abuse scandal...

someone_else wrote: The Scriptures speak of hell as well, and no one in the Scriptures speaks more about hell than Jesus. No matter what tradition makes of it:   And if thy right eye offend thee, pluck it out, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell. (Matt. 5:29)   Ye serpents, ye generation of vipers, how can ye escape the damnation of hell? (Matt. 23:33)

Right.  And when Jesus uses that word, did he mean a place of eternal, conscious torture and physical agony?

I submit that he did not.

The Doctor wrote: Epignosis wrote: npjnpj wrote: Sorry. Means you get to choose what suits you best and disregard any negatives. No, it means I examine the Bible in its historical, cultural, and linguistic context and I discard tradition when tradition clashes with scripture. It isn't about what "suits" me best, it's about having exegetical integrity, that's all.   I had that once.  It was painful.    You really should see a doctor.

I went to one, but this doctor kept talking about wanting to examine my hermeneutics. 

npjnpj wrote: Sorry. Means you get to choose what suits you best and disregard any negatives.

No, it means I examine the Bible in its historical, cultural, and linguistic context and I discard tradition when tradition clashes with scripture.

It isn't about what "suits" me best, it's about having exegetical integrity, that's all.

npjnpj wrote: You mean you get to pick out the raisins?

What?


Edited by Epignosis - April 22 2010 at 06:54

npjnpj wrote: Thank you, aim to please.   But honestly, I realise how overboard it is, but this business makes me so unbelievably angry, that I have to vent my feelings a bit.

I believe in God, but I do not believe in the existence of hell (as tradition puts it).

npjnpj wrote: Much too complicated. Anyone who abuses children can't possbly believe in the existance of hell. If you don't believe in hell, you can't believe in God either, they just go together as a package. So, as a priest, if you don't believe in God, you shouldn't be allowed to stay a member of the church. On top of that, if the swines' heads roll, it's good PR for Pope Rottweiler, the effin' hypocrite.

That's some real, airtight logic right there. 

Ivan, as a Catohlic, shouldn't you be worried that child abuse cover-ups by senior officials are a possibility? I get the court of public opinion, media mongering, and all. It's complete garbage and I'm sure many innocent priests have capitulated to stuff they shouldn't have, just to avoid potentially dire outcomes. But still, seems like it could be dangerous to not at least have a little suspicion. I personally could buy  either way, that there was a cover up or there wasn't, but if noone asks the question, can the answer be known? You have to be willing to turn the microscope on yourself, whether personally, or organizationally. That's my dime store philosophy. I have no idea what kind of internal justice system the Catholics have, but I hope they are doing something. Any justice system will be rendered useless if one is afraid to prosecute for fear of false accusation. Heck, theres too much of that in America as there is, when it comes to accusing those who are in power or in the money. I guess all I'm saying is that, in the end, isn't ignoring the issue worse?

Edited by Deathrabbit - April 22 2010 at 01:51

Atkingani wrote: The T wrote: seventhsojourn wrote: The T wrote: Now a big catholic priest equated pedophilia with homosexualism....  How great these people always are, aren't they?  But hey! Funny Old Ratzinger apologized The Beatles!    Generalisation... not all are the same.  True   So, in attempting to diffuse the abuse scandal the Pope's number 2 has made things worse by offending gays. Worse still, he made his comments on a trip to Santiago where a priest was retained at an all-girl school despite many complaints about him abusing the girls. SMH.    Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens want the Pope arrested if he visits the UK...   That will never happen. First the charges against him should be made official, not just media noise. Second, I don't think no police force and no judge will have the strength and fortitude to dare to incite the hate of millions of catholics around the world... And no president or country's authority will want the weight of such decision upon their heads.... No. Ratzinger will not face anything. Dawkins and Hitchens, with who I agree most of the time, are certainly just trying to become more notorious with this. Unless there's POSITIVE PROOF, none will raise a finger towards the Rome Guy.    Just remembering that the Pope (no matter who) is also Vatican's Head of State.   Can someone believe in a country arresting another country's head of state while visiting it after being invited?

seventhsojourn wrote: The T wrote: Now a big catholic priest equated pedophilia with homosexualism....  How great these people always are, aren't they?  But hey! Funny Old Ratzinger apologized The Beatles!    Generalisation... not all are the same.  True   So, in attempting to diffuse the abuse scandal the Pope's number 2 has made things worse by offending gays. Worse still, he made his comments on a trip to Santiago where a priest was retained at an all-girl school despite many complaints about him abusing the girls. SMH.    Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens want the Pope arrested if he visits the UK...