Isn't it obscenely ironic that after post-war Catholics almost single-handedly brought human rights into fruition the secular world uses 'muh rights' to legalize a bunch of shit Catholics hate? How did this happen?
>>973916
muh rights was already a thing before human rights. catholics just tried to make it into something decent to read, instead of some dumb shit like the us constitution
>>973916
>Isn't it obscenely ironic that after post-war Catholics almost single-handedly brought human rights into fruition the secular world uses 'muh rights' to legalize a bunch of shit Catholics hate? How did this happen?
>This is what catholic actually believe
In the 19th century the church constantly railed against classical liberalism. Even now the church does not accept the classical liberal definition of human rights and as substituted their own
>>973916
>Isn't it obscenely ironic that after post-war Catholics almost single-handedly brought human rights into fruition
America is not the whole world. Also, most Catholics don't mind contraception and evolution, abortion is a big no-no for them but aside from that they're much more in harmony with civilisation than Proddycucks are.
>>973945
Even secular scholars credit the Catholics for most of the work. At the time the secular progressive crowd thought the notion of human rights was a bourgeois construction.
>>973954
I'm not even talking about America. I'm talking about post WW2 Europe. It seems like /his/ is just leftist /pol/
>>973916
This doesn't seem to be thread dedicated to a serious discussion but rather a ploy to get a circle jerk session for your beliefs
>>973954
Fuck off, Christcucks. Like we the general public give a damn if you're Catholics or Orthodox or Protestant, in the same fashion you hardly care whether the Muslim is Shia or Sunni or Sufi and in the same way you treated "heretics" of the past, such that in most cases we don't even know what they actually called themselves.
>>973916
The Catholics sponsored the Holocaust.
So no, they had no part in morality whatsoever.
>>973971
>Even secular scholars credit the Catholics for most of the work.
>citation needed
>>973934
They tried to monopolize it as they did anything else, because they literally can't stand the idea that the world doesn't fit their monolithic concepts.
You see the butchered logic here. Morality and ethics are the sole domain of religion. And X interpretation of Y religion is the only legitimate one. Therefore, all of society should be thankful for and convert to Y because otherwise they'll murderfuck everything. Which is not to say that morality is not an important aspect of religion. But this alleged monopoly on it creates a tidy little narrative that justifies being an elitist cunt.
Consider that quote for example. It suggests that he's utterly incapable of framing atheism as anything but a projection of his own religious beliefs. A human under this logic is a slave to a monolithic concept of faith in the supernatural. There is no absence of faith, only faith in other shit. Fucking nonsense and semantics at best.
>>973945
There is a Catholic doctrine called equivocation which basically means using a word that other people think has a certain defination but in your inner circle it means somethign quite different. This allows them to sound noble and good when they are actually talking shit.
For instance the Catholic use for "human rights" means sometimes quite different than what normal people use it for.
This doctrine is effectivily the Catholic version of Taqiyya, which allows them to lie about anything. It used by Bishops to help cover up child abuse cases for instance.
>>975081
Nice meme.
>>975124
>There is a Catholic doctrine called equivocation
Bullshit. There is no doctrine on the matter.
>>975052
t. falsy mcflag
>>973982
>It seems like /his/ is just leftist /pol/
How did you draw that conclusion from his post?
>>975081
>The Catholics sponsored the Holocaust.
KGB propaganda. Catholicism and Nazism were both enemies of the Soviet state.
It's effectivley like a historian 50 years from now saying "Kim Jong-un directly funded ISIS."
>>975124
>he honestly believes this
>>978315
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mental_reservation
>The doctrine of mental reservation, or of mental equivocation
> most often associated with the Jesuits.
associated with Sexual abuse scandal in the Catholic archdiocese of Dublin
tldr: Catholics are allowed to lie about anything as long as they think it's done for moral reasons. It doesn't "count as sinning" as the you do the equivalent of crossing your fingers behind your back.
>>975081
Look up the electiok results. The bulk of the nazi voter base was east germany/prussia. Bavaria had its own party.
>>978400
>implying there's anything wrong with that
It's like pious frauds. Taqqiya on the other hand is evil because islam is literally a satanic religion.
>>978400
I honestly don't see the big deal about this.
>>978405
look up the catholic partys voting record, in particular its support of the 1933 enabling act 1933 where it handed Hitler dictatorial powers, allowing the opening of concentration camps.
>>978496
>>978508
There is no clear definition of what constitutes "morally good reasons" to lie with equivocation. If you personally think it's a good idea you can justify any lie. Furthermore they don't even think it counts as lying as long as they use weasel words.. This is a doctrine that literally allowed bishops to protect child rapists because they thought church reputation was more important than stopping pedophilia. The wording of the doctrine is so vague and open to interpretation you can use it for anything, even the most disgusting acts. You're telling me you don't see a problem?
>>978562
Friendly reminder:
>Sue Widemark A Penn State historian, Philip Jenkins, has done in-depth research of pedophilia and sexual abuse among the clergy and has come up with some rather eye opening facts (Pedophiles and Priests, Anatomy of a Crisis, Oxford University Press, 1996, Paperback edition, 2001). It seems that while .2 to 1.7 percent of Catholic clergy have been guilty of pedophilia (or sexual abuse particularly of boys, p. 80-82), a whopping 10 percent of Protestant ministers have been found guilty of sexual misconduct with a 2 or 3 percent pedophilia rate (p. 50-52).
>This is all the more interesting, notes Jenkins, since there has been NO media term "Pastor Pedophilia" coined at all! Jenkins theorizes that the media, proving the 'point' of the 'necessity' of sexual promiscuity, overemphasizes any instance of pedophilia found among the Catholic clergy since it can use this to criticize the entire idea of celibacy. But it is interesting that the NON Celibate Protestant ministers have a MUCH GREATER problem with it than the celibate Catholic priests!
>Jenkins' research was based on several highly respected studies and statistics. He points out that whereas sexual misconduct has always been a problem, among Catholic and non-Catholic clergy as well as among the general populace, what is new now is that the 'problem' of priest sexual abuse, constructed by the media as a result of a 'moral panic' occurring in the mid-1980's.
http://www.catholic-convert.com/wp-content/uploads/SexInProtestantChurches.pdf
>>978331
Anything that doesn't agree with him is leftypol.
>>978570
>2 to 1.7 percent of Catholic clergy have been guilty of pedophilia
Daily reminder:
The catholic church is guilty of hiding the majority of its aberrant priests because it fears loosing its worldly possessions (money) ever wondered why there were no convicted pedo priests 20 years ago?
>>978570
Can you Catholic-apologists stop sucking Mary's tit for one second use your head?
Protestants having their own problems does not make Catholics any less guilty. And it certainly doesn't excuse the fact that your own dogma allows you to lie about fucking children. I don't know of any Protestant denomination that has a similar doctrine to equivocation.
And frankly I can't find anything on your study that isn't shady looking website. The one you sent me is from a conversion website and we already know Catholics are allowed to lie about anything.
>>978570
>>978595
Are you seriously trying to say simply condemning the acts within the internal structure of the church was enough? That not reporting it was perfectly fine because the church didn't say it was ok? What the fuck is wrong with you? The problem isn't the percentages its the way it was handled. Not reporting it lead to allowing for those clergy responsible for molesting children to simply be moved around to other churches. It doesn't matter if only 1.7% committed crimes when the way the church responded was to just move them somewhere else and keep quiet on it you faggot.
Also separation of church and state was the problem? Is this a joke? Separation of church and state doesn't mean those who knew about the ongoing crimes against children at the hands of priests couldn't report them. This was purely a problem inside the structure of the church. It was complacency and a refusal to acknowledge the problem until it finally came to light. Pointing to other religious clergy guilty of misconduct doesn't negate the catholic church's lies.
You christcucks will go through any amount of mental gymnastics to defend your whore of a church.
>>978400
So basically you're for telling a 3 year old things he's too young to understand and might confuse or scare him and against not saying something that he could misinterpret and become distraught by? Because last I checked
>lying to decieve=/=lying to protect
>T-this has nothing to do with Jesus!
>pedophiles are everywhere, stop picking on Catholics!
That's not the point you miserable subhuman. The point is how the church handled it, not that there's other pedophiles. This is PURLEY about church officials LIYING TO THE LAYMAN.
>>978844
>lying to protect
>what the church was doing in regards to the pedophila problem
Don't insult my intelligence Anon. If the church cared at all about protecting its flock they wouldn't have ignored a horrible injustice against the most innocent of the faithful. Stop trying to justify the wrongdoings of men
>>978844
The problem is vague words. A Bishop trying could say he is "protecting" a pedophile rather than say he is "deceiving" the police. The doctrine of mental reservation is completely subjective. The liar is the one that decides if it is moral, if the motive is good, if the cause is good, he can justify everything and anything. And if it's a good lie no one will call him out, meaning he doesn't have to answer to anyone. You can lie whenever you want about whatever you want if your Catholic.
We don't need to play hypotheical "what if" games. We already see exactly how the doctrine plays in the sex scandal. The church's claim to having a "moral code" is just another lie. The code exists on paper to make them look pious, it's marketing.
>>978844
Are you actually agreeing that protecting the reputation of guilty, pedophiles is more important than keeping children safe?
What a disgusting religion.
>>975124
What !? Source or GTFO?
>>978906
The bishops weren't focused on the protecting pedo priests, but trying to lessen media outrage from psychos who already hate us by trying to figure out what to do and hopefully settle matters quietly.
If anything they were trying to protect the INNOCENT PRIESTS from character assassination.
>>979476
People hate the RCC because it's the most evil organization on earth.
>>978918
They weren't protecting the pedo ones, but attempting to protect the innocent priests and church as a whole from getting yelled at by people who already hate them.
>>979476
Protecting innocent children?
No, protecting their molesters.
Just vile.
>>979487
Kill yourself.
>>978763
>Pedophile priests molesting children has NOTHING to do with Jesus Christ.
Neither does the Roman Catholic Church.
>>979493
Innocent priests, i.e. The ones who didn't diddle the kiddies.
>>979494
If I did, I would be in heaven.
If you did, you'd be in hell.
That's the difference between belonging in the most evil institution on earth, and calling it out.
>>979498
Assuming any such animal exists, it would be far down the line FROM PROTECTING LITTLE BOYS FROM BEING SODOMIZED BY PRIESTS.
>>979487
>>979497
Protestants GTFO
>>979509
Replace priest with schoolteacher and you'd immediately change your tune.
>>979552
Even teacher's unions are appalled by the ease the catholic church protects known pedophiles. When a local Los Angeles case was being prepped for trial, and the teacher's defense was "she was 13 and asked for it", the RCC had to pull out of defending pedophiles.
Because that's what they do. Defend the pedophiles they rush through shit seminaries to hurt children.
>>979497
Your statement is objectively false, silly proddy.
>>979629
Zero. Zilch. Nada.
>>979476
>>979491
The "protection" the Bishops gave was to deny that there were actual pedophiles in the church. They would take the rapists and put them in new churches, in new cities to get them away from the media. The result would be the priests have new victims and their crimes go unpunished.
The fact that you are concerned about the reputation of the church rather than the well being of the children shows how disgusting the Catholic religion truly is. Catholic apologists like you, are more upset that the church's reputation was harmed than that the actual children were harmed.
>>979637
Jesus has nothing to do with the Catholic church, and the Catholic church has nothing to do with Jesus.
>>979666
Nice trips. And if the full extent of the scandal were known, even these idiots who judge the Catholic church by their nice little father on the corner handing out bologna sammiches to the homeless would be reviled.
>>979679
Keep telling yourself that.
>>979689
Catholics.webm
>>979736
>this is what proddies actually believe
lmao
Go speak ''in tongues'' or something.
>>979752
Not Protestant or Catholic but speaking tongues is actually mentioned in the bible. It was also a legitimate part of early Christian beliefs.
In general Catholics deviate from the bible more than they would like to admit, this is because they prioritize a few theologians books more than the actual bible. Protestantism tends to read the bible much more literally with theologians have virtually no authority.
Both of them get stuff wrong though.
>>973954
If you're a Catholic and aren't against contraception then you aren't actually a Catholic
>>979794
You are biblically illiterate.
>''And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance. And there were dwelling at Jerusalem Jews, devout men, out of every nation under heaven. Now when this was noised abroad, the multitude came together, and were confounded, because that every man heard them speak in his own language. And they were all amazed and marvelled, saying one to another, Behold, are not all these which speak Galilaeans?''
>''And how hear we every man in our own tongue, wherein we were born? Parthians, and Medes, and Elamites, and the dwellers in Mesopotamia, and in Judaea, and Cappadocia, in Pontus, and Asia, Phrygia, and Pamphylia, in Egypt, and in the parts of Libya about Cyrene, and strangers of Rome, Jews and proselytes, Cretes and Arabians, we do hear them speak in our tongues the wonderful works of God.''
Acts 2:4-11
>''If any man speak in an unknown tongue, let it be by two, or at the most by three, and that by course; and let one interpret. But if there be no interpreter, let him keep silence in the church; and let him speak to himself, and to God.''
1 Corinthians 14:27-28
>''For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.''
1 Corinthians 14:33
>>979752
Yes. I believe most, if not all, catholics will go to hell, and there are many verses in the bible that so indicate.
>>979919
Actually, you are the one who cannot put the same thoughts together from the bible.
1. Tongues is a gift.
2. Paul said the gift is not to be used to babble; and
3. Keep reading.
1 Corinthians 14
Therefore, brethren, desire earnestly to prophesy, and do not forbid to speak with tongues. Let all things be done decently and in order.
Paul's telling people not to have 20 people standing and speaking in tongues at once, not to avoid speaking in tongues, ever.
Wrong again on the bible, papist.
>>979794
>Not Protestant or Catholic but speaking tongues is actually mentioned in the bible.
Ever watch PPG? Remember how Bubbles can speak every language? That's speaking in tongues, not babbling in indecipherable gibberish.
>>979950
Learn how to quote the Bible dipshit.
>papist
Stop, you're making the Lord cringe.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_popes#1st_century
>>979972
>1 Corinthians 14
>Therefore, brethren, desire earnestly to prophesy, and do not forbid to speak with tongues. Let all things be done decently and in order.
What was that again?
Papist?
Why are you proud of those evil men? Do you know how villainous many of them were? Or don't you care?
>>979970
Nobody ever said speaking in tongues is indecipherable gibberish.
>>979979
>I still can't quote the Bible
Stop embarassing yourself.
>>979984
Once she starts tonguing, I can't understand it, the apostles were understood by everyone despite language barriers. If she was truly speaking in tongues, it would sound like English to me.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=vsrwgd7rnR0
>>979666
And what is the situation now? The past is done, you can't change it, but what changes are being done now to prevent further injustice?
Do you disown your child for doing smack?
>>980012
Now you realize the Catholic church is trash and you distance yourself from it.
These families that had their children raped by priests had to fight the church in court. The church spent millions defending each indivual priest, many of whom they already knew were guilty, so not only did the church harm families but than they make the families have to sink their costs into getting a lawyer and hope the lawyer the Vatacin to defend their monster won't rob them of their justice.
The church still shows that it cares more about reputation than actually helping the children. The very doctrine of "equivocation" that enabled this to happen is still accepted, in fact there are people in this very thread defending it even after they being told it's what enabled the victims to hide their tricks.
And the biggest joke of all. What happens when the leader of their very church is accused of intionally helping pedophiles? Yes, Pope Benedict XV was accused of knowingly helping to conceal the crimes of child rapists. He managed to weasel his way out by claiming dimplomatic immunity.
This shows us the church has ZERO interest in ridding itself of pedphiles. It does not bring the ring-leader to justice. In fact it makes them into Saints and claims they are God's Chosen. And than the apologesists somehow manage to try to turn the leader of one of the biggest child-rape rings in existence into a victim. This is not an institution of holy men, it's not even men, these are demons.
>>980078
Keep pretending that the Church condoned it.
>>979992
You too lazy to read the entire chapter, all of which is relevant? Or are you too lazy to read that one verse?
You cite verses, and don't know what they mean and try to twist them into something you want them to say, but don't.
>>980000
What a waste of a get.
Speaking in a foreign tongue that others can understand but you never learned = speaking in tongues. Or speaking in the tongues of angels.
But when people are told they have to demonstrate this gift in order to "prove" they're saved, you get people pretending to speak gibberish. The fault is in the people demanding proof, not in the person trying to supply it.
>>980078
>these are demons.
Amen.
>>980234
Keep pretending it doesn't happen at the HIGHEST levels.
>>980265
Speaking in tongues = speaking in languages you've never learned such as greek, latin, aramaic etc. not gibberish
Read 1 Corinthians 14:27-28 and 33.
And once again:
>''And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance. And there were dwelling at Jerusalem Jews, devout men, out of every nation under heaven. Now when this was noised abroad, the multitude came together, and were confounded, because that every man heard them speak in his own language. And they were all amazed and marvelled, saying one to another, Behold, are not all these which speak Galilaeans?''
>every man heard them speak in his own language
>in his own language
>''And how hear we every man in our own tongue, wherein we were born? Parthians, and Medes, and Elamites, and the dwellers in Mesopotamia, and in Judaea, and Cappadocia, in Pontus, and Asia, Phrygia, and Pamphylia, in Egypt, and in the parts of Libya about Cyrene, and strangers of Rome, Jews and proselytes, Cretes and Arabians, we do hear them speak in our tongues the wonderful works of God.''
>And how hear we every man in our own tongue
>in our own tongue
>we do hear them speak in our tongues
>in our tongues
Acts 2:4-11
Christianity paints a picture of a weak and degenerate humanity. Where are the lions of antiquity? Washed over with the lie that is sin. Christians should have stuck to lepers and semites, and not deigned to usurp civilized peoples.
>>980281
What God can do with lepers and semites surpasses everything you luciferian types dream of.
>>980281
>Where are the lions of antiquity
In the trash along with every other primitive animist bs.
>Washed over with the lie that is sin
You are a sinner and you know it.
>usurp civilized peoples
Wow, is this what atheists actually believe? Hahaha. Watch:
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLZDj5nM0KbdUTEpoka1oyAR8BtHfIiVJm
>b-but muh hedonistic roman paganism
Into the trash it is.
>>980292
>conflates paganism with hedonism
>cannot be moral without god
You speak as a slave does. You are a slave. You will not even deny it.
>>980356
>massa whips me in mysterious ways
>so it's ok, because I don't understand it and massa is smarter than me!
>>980356
>cannot be moral without god
Most people can't.
>>980450
>Trading one god figure for another results in the same brutish behavior
>but it's ok when I do it!
t. papist
t. for-profit evangelist
>>980468
>expecting people to be nihilistic
At least with the Abrahamic religions there are differences of interpretation and dissenting opinion, not just "MUH REICH/FATHERLAND" absolutism.
>>980494
>who are insane, immoral italian popes using their position as a god figure for personal and familial benefit.
>what is the basis of Italy's crippling nepotism
>>980356
Pagan temples were feasts and orgies.
You cannot have an objective basis for morality without God.
YOU are the slave. YOU are a slave to sin.
>>980504
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saint_Peter
>>980506
By definition, "pagan" encompasses all religion that is not Abrahamic. I've actually been to temples. I've burned incense in them. There were no naked women. There were no orgies. You know nothing.
>>980531
>personal anecdote
Not even disagreeing with you, but c'mon mane.
>>980506
>Pagan temples were feasts and orgies
You know in the anti-Christian documents the pagans say the exact same things about the Christians. The opposite is true, Christians borrow from Pagan ideas.
>You cannot have an objective basis for morality without God
Morality is just as objective (or not objective) with a God. We had hundreds of years of Christian rule and it resulted in some of the most immoral things in history. Saying that a God surpports an idea does not make it objective. Escpially when God is constantly being interpretted by subjective humans.
The claim that God has a monopoly on morality is to benefit the priesthood that interpretes what God wants.
You have the attitude of a slave who loves his chains. No don't consider morality for yourself, don't make your own choices. You're just a stupid filthy sinner! Why remember what happened when humans started doing anything other than listening to God? They were kicked of a magical garden. But don't worry you can go to a place even cooler than the Garden if you are a good sheep! Yes you are a good sheep arn't you? The lord is your shepard and he brings you to green pastures? Who's a dumb little sheep! Yes you are!! He's a dumb little sheep that can't think for himself! That's you boy!
>>980546
Truth must be experienced.
>>980275
Latin mass btfo.
>>980078
Lots of past tense, no present tense.
What are they doing NOW? I don't care about before, what about now? Truly you are the wicked one holding a sin over a sinner, unforgiving and prideful.
The mere fact the Church encourages the viewing of Spotlight and even endorsed it shows they are penitential about this sin and are not afraid to address it. All sin shall come to light, this one has and penance is being made.
Or do you have evidence that nothing is being done and the Church DOESNT want to acknowledge this? Because endorsing Spotlight is kinda conflicts with being unrepentant.
>>980902
Let me repeat this. Pope Benedict was long suspected of knowingly aiding pedophiles. He was summoned to court and cowers out claiming diplomatic immunity. Than he dies, becomes a Saint, and the church has no interest in making any documents public. If the church had nothing to hide they wouldn't need to do this.
When there is a scandel like this in a school or a Protestant church those people work WITH THE POLICE to root out any wrong-doerers. This what any decent human would do. They open up the files and give information to the people trying to catch the rapists. The Catholic church does they opposite, they give no information to the authorities until the legal system forces them to, and even than they find ways to weasel out of it. They don't want people to see their documents, only the guilty have something to hide. In contrast the other organizations do not do this.
Just get your face out of Mary's tit for a second and imagine this. Your child was raped, authorities think the leader of the organization allowed this to happen. The leader refuses to step into court and the entire society backs him up on this. A few years later this same organization wants you to think they are your friend.
No reforms. All their information is still kept secret. The bishops of accused of orchestrating the crime ring were never brought to justice
Oh and the new leader of the organization wants to bring a bunch of rapists over into your country so they can fuck your wife. And your Cuckthlics defend these traitors.
>>981018
Maybe you should take a break from /pol/ before you overdose on red pills.
>>981018
>Let me repeat this. Pope Benedict was long suspected of knowingly aiding pedophiles. He was summoned to court and cowers out claiming diplomatic immunity. Than he dies, becomes a Saint, and the church has no interest in making any documents public. If the church had nothing to hide they wouldn't need to do this.
Benedict isn't dead, plus those documents of which you speak aren't Church property. They're police property.
>When there is a scandel like this in a school or a Protestant church those people work WITH THE POLICE to root out any wrong-doerers. This what any decent human would do. They open up the files and give information to the people trying to catch the rapists. The Catholic church does they opposite, they give no information to the authorities until the legal system forces them to, and even than they find ways to weasel out of it. They don't want people to see their documents, only the guilty have something to hide. In contrast the other organizations do not do this.
The legal system owns the documents as evidence, take it up with them.
>
Just get your face out of Mary's tit for a second and imagine this. Your child was raped, authorities think the leader of the organization allowed this to happen. The leader refuses to step into court and the entire society backs him up on this. A few years later this same organization wants you to think they are your friend.
Don't blaspheme against the Ark of the Covanent.
Second, is Obama guilt of Watergate?
>no reforms
Or you just don't give a fuck to look for any.
>muh cucked Europe Muslism rapist /pol/-speak
Actual refugees should be welcomed and aided, that's all we care about. Those that came for cash and benefits that ARENT running in fear of ISIS aren't on the the Pope's Aid Refugee Radar because they aren't refugees.
>>979682
Or they wouldn't because we realize sin exists, that all can and will sin, that we should try and fix it and that the Truth proclaimed by the Church and the good she does doesn't get voided by a sin commited by her members, no matter how greivous.
>ITT: unforgiving assholes who want to complain about shit they don't care to try and help fix and overly forgiving assholes who aren't going to jack off hate boners because some assholes did something deplorable since that doesn't change what they preach or negate any good they do
>>979752
PERKELE
(I am technically speaking in tongues, as in, another language.)
>>981018
I may disagree with Francis, but he did say that the pedo prieats could go fuck themselves and said yeah, the RCC would cooperate with the police to bring to justice the pedopriests.
He's also told the Italian Mafia to go fuck themselves too. If you're gonna go "muh evil".
>>978562
>There is no clear definition of what constitutes "morally good reasons" to lie with equivocation.
Of course there is, they just dont appear on wikipedia
> The wording of the doctrine is so vague and open to interpretation you can use it for anything
Of course not, it must be used for morally good reasons, like preventing the unjust murder of a person, it doesnt justify protecting child abusers
>>981833
People can fuck up and fuck up royally, to the point you can say they are irredeemable.
Christianity is about that being fixed despite how unworthy and wicked we are. The Church's members can and do sin greatly, even our leaders can and do sin. St. Peter renounced Jesus on the eve of His Passion and yet he later died processing complete and perfect piety to the Sacred Heart, even dying like his Lord, albeit upside down due to a feeling of unworthiness.
Yes, there was a great and heinous sin among the clergy, we know that, those strong in their faith aren't shaken by that. What sins we forgive are forgiven and what sins we retain are retained. Forgive the sin and assist in the penance and renewal. Fix the problem, don't abandon it.
Pic related is the Holy Solution to the Ancient Problem.
>>981936
I wasnt saying that a sinful clergy disproves the Catholic Church, rather, I said that the doctrine of mental reservation doesnt justify protecting child abusers, which is what the anon seemed to imply in his rant against mental reservation.
>>978549
No one that Hitler = concentration camps in 1933, and the camps weren't built until years later. Meanwhile the only party who voted against dictatorial powers were the SPD - and not necessarily because they agreed in full with the act. The entire meeting was surrounded by SA as an act of intimidation.
>>981936
If only Catholics would report abuse quickly to the police and stand by one another against the offender(s) you would be right. They do not.They are in denial and fear for their disobedience to what they perceive as the intercessors to God and eternal life. Quite a racket.
>>982137
>concentration camps in 1933
The first Nazi concentration camps were erected in Germany in March 1933 immediately after Hitler became Chancellor and his Nazi Party was given control over the police through Reich Interior Minister Wilhelm Frick and Prussian Acting Interior Minister Hermann Göring.[2] Used to hold and torture political opponents and union organizers, the camps initially held around 45,000 prisoners.[3]
>>982185
Fair point, I was ill-informed. I still don't think at the time of voting for the act most members outside the Nazi party had any idea about the nature or full extent of the future concentration camps, or the political will to oppose the Nazi party in the face of violent intimidation.
In short I don't think ignorance and cowardice mean we can condemn the non-Nazi members of the Reichstag who voted for the act - the acts outcomes were not representative wholesale of those men's beliefs. I'm not saying they were good people, just that voting for the enabling act does not necessarily mean the Catholics, liberals, or any of the other parties supported the opening of concentration camps.
What makes this issue so problematic for the Catholic Church - lies in its insistence on protecting the wrongdoer from the possibility of rash judgement. Back in pre-Catholic times, however, during the time when Christianity was correctly practiced, that was not the case. In one account, there arose a case of incest within the Christian congregation. One of its members was cohabiting with his father’s wife (we can’t say for sure if she was indeed his actual birth mother). This was an utterly repugnant situation back then and the apostle Paul wrote a letter to correct the problem:
“though absent in body but present in spirit, I have already, as if I were present, judged him who has done this deed, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ. When you are assembled, along with my spirit, in the power of our Lord Jesus Christ, deliver him to Satan for the destruction of the flesh, so that the spirit may be saved on the day of the Lord Jesus.” - 1 Corinthians 5:3-5 Modern English Version
The man who was committing this adulterous/incestuous act had to be handed over “to Satan;” the devil being the god and ruler of the World – [2nd Corinthians 4:4] Hence the man – was to be judged outside the Christian congregation – way outside the jurisdiction of the overseers of the early Church. The result was the preservation – not of the man’s spirit, as translated in many Bible versions, but the preservation of the Congregation’s spirit. The congregation remained spiritually clean. So rather than insisting that ones who commit an unacceptable deed is protected from justice outside, the early Christians placed recalcitrant members under the custody of Caesar’s Law.
>>982096
Some people can pervert a good, or at the very least, misuse a good trying to do good in their mind and cause evil.
If anything, mental reservation just exists to cover the base of "are white lies as sinful as intentional black lies." But you treat it like it's as central to Catholicism as the doctrine of Transubstantiation.
Mental reservation is doctrine yes, but not key doctrine central to faith.
>>982184
You sound like you'd hate the Church even if this never happened. Your opinion is worthless
>>982443
>pre Catholic
>true Christianity
Historically illiterate Evangelical Christian detected.
>>975124
For a time, some theologians used the term "strict mental reservation" to refer to a statement which is directly and deliberately false, but which is modified to become true by an unstated (mentally-reserved) qualification. However, this idea was subsequently condemned by Pope Innocent XI [Santissimus Dominus, n. 26, 27.]. Since then, strict mental reservation has been held to be merely a type of lying. For in strict mental reservation, the assertion is directly and deliberately deprived of truth. And the unexpressed qualification does not affect the deprivation of truth in what is expressed (or asserted), because that qualification is unexpressed (not asserted). This act is entirely unlike true mental reservation, which asserts one truth, while reserving another truth. An act of strict mental reservation asserts a falsehood, and therefore is not true mental reservation, but is merely a lie. The proper definition of mental reservation excludes strict mental reservation, since that act fits the proper definition of lying.
Mental reservation is the expression of one truth, with the reservation (i.e. the omission) of a related truth. There are two types of limitations that may cause a statement to be a type of mental reservation: (1) the expression of a truth with the omission of a related truth, or (2) the expression of a truth with the omission of the true manner of interpretation. In the first case, there are two related truths; one is expressed and another is omitted. In the second case, the related truth that is omitted is merely the proper manner of interpretation of the expressed truth. Human language often has multiple possible meanings; this commonly-understood feature of language does not cause what is expressed to be a lie.
>>982096
Mental reservation isn't inherently moral or immoral. It just isn't classified the same as lying.
Lying is a sin.
Mental reservation can be a sin and it also cannot be.
Use of the present tense to make a true statement solely about the present situation, reserving another truth about a past situation, is an example of mental reservation, not 'strict mental reservation'.
"Strict mental reservation" refers to a statement which is directly and deliberately false, but which is modified to become true by an unstated (mentally-reserved) qualification. However, this idea was subsequently condemned by Pope Innocent XI [Santissimus Dominus, n. 26, 27.]. Since then, strict mental reservation has been held to be merely a type of lying. For in strict mental reservation, the assertion is directly and deliberately deprived of truth. And the unexpressed qualification does not affect the deprivation of truth in what is expressed (or asserted), because that qualification is unexpressed (not asserted). This act is entirely unlike true mental reservation, which asserts one truth, while reserving another truth. An act of strict mental reservation asserts a falsehood, and therefore is not true mental reservation, but is merely a lie. The proper definition of mental reservation excludes strict mental reservation, since that act fits the proper definition of lying.
The use of mental reservation is not always moral; it depends on intention and circumstances as to whether or not it is moral. I'm not going to be the judge of whether or not that particular use of mental reservation by a Cardinal was moral, but it is not lying and is not an example of strict mental reservation (which is actually a type of lying, not a type of true mental reservation).
>>983860
>the expression of a truth with the omission of a related truth,
Example: I did not rape rape your child (today!)
>the expression of a truth with the omission of the true manner of interpretation.
We Catholics respect the law (and by law I mean our own rules and screw our nation's law)
>It just isn't classified the same as lying.
It's using rule-sharking to make it "not count" as a lie under Catholic definations of truth. But for everyone else these are lies. These are weasel words, what a disgusting religion.
>The use of mental reservation is not always moral; it depends on intention and circumstances as to whether or not it is moral
The fact is that you cannot make an accurate judgement call about whether the Catholic infront of you is virtuous when they are LYING TO YOUR FACE. What a corrupt priest thinks is "moral" and what the general public think is "moral" is two different things.
This is one of the things that leads to fucking narcissism with these people. They think their idea of right and wrong is the fucking divine order of the universe, this makes them lack the empathy to even consider other people's reality. When a Catholic says they are "moral" they mean the Pope's defination of morality, when they say they are "honest" they mean their fork-tongued definition of "honesty", when they say they respect "law" they are not talking about the same law as you and me. They use language-tricks to deceive. According to their own sick and twisted defiant ion of truth they are not telling a lie and protecting the "people". To everyone else they using blatant lies to protect their own people.
>>983952
But Anon, the Catholic Church is the One True Church. It was founded by God himself. Of course their morality is the right morality. Everyone else is just varying degrees of wrong.
>>978400
>All Catholics are Jesuits
Americans...
>>984139
The current Pope is a Jesuit.
>>983952
You have a really screwed up idea on what we consider "doctrine" to entail.
Newsflash, in this case t's actually a long series of explanations on varying things that are of interest to those trying to live virtuously.
For example, Catechism of the Catholic Church 2117, our doctrine on Magic and Sorcery:
>2117 All practices of magic or sorcery, by which one attempts to tame occult powers, so as to place them at one's service and have a supernatural power over others - even if this were for the sake of restoring their health - are gravely contrary to the virtue of religion. These practices are even more to be condemned when accompanied by the intention of harming someone, or when they have recourse to the intervention of demons. Wearing charms is also reprehensible. Spiritism often implies divination or magical practices; the Church for her part warns the faithful against it. Recourse to so-called traditional cures does not justify either the invocation of evil powers or the exploitation of another's credulity
This is not a guide on how to do something, but it is doctrine. Similarly, mental reservation is not a strictly Catholic concept, but one with doctrine about it from a Catholic standing.
And besides, the Catechism is intended as a basic compendium of Catholic doctrine, assembled with due ecclesiastical care, and not as a collection of definitive infallible pronouncements permanently settling every question on every topic it covers. In other words, the change in definition does not mean the original formulation was wrong. But it does mean that the editors of the Catechism were not prepared to endorse it in an official Catholic reference work. We take things like this on a case by case basis. Doctrine on mental reservation isn't tacit permission to lie, but teaching on how it works and what to think of it, in this case "permissible in certain circumstances but not something to employ solely to decieve and maintain a false sense of moral upstanding."
>>983952
>>984688
And compared to Taqqiya, which is "If it's for the good of spreading Islam, lie and decieve," mental reservation is "lying is evil, but there are circumstances where one could achieve a moral good from saying a thing a certain way so that it is truthful in a way. It is still deception never the less, but the complete circumstances of the case in question can make it licit or abhorrent."
Situational understanding of "the little white lie" is not the same as "lie all you want so you can later betray others for Allah!" Cases of Taqqiya can't be challenged, cases of mental reservation can.
>>984736
You know I've heard several Islamics defend Taqqiya. They give the exact same responses as the Catholics defending mental reservation. That it is only used "for moral reasons".
Of course a Catholic or a Muslims idea's of "moral reasons" conveniently allows it to be anything that helps their religion. Spreading Islam/Catholism is the ultimate good, God/Allah himself appointed their church to be the ultimate judge in all manner of things, so the preservation of the church and it's increase in power is a great good which justify their tiny little lies. This is the thought process they have. Just like Muslims Catholcis took have an outer circle of apologetics that cover for the dirty work of the more radical cultists. We see the moderate Islamics defending the very doctrine that allows jihad, and the moderate Catholics defending the very doctrine that allows lying to the police to protect child rapists. There is no apology, no desire to reform. Islam is the left ball of Satan and Catholicism is the right ball.
>>984807
Mental reservation isn't a get out of sin excuse. You can't just declare it and be absolved. Because that's not the point of it. Mental reservation is not a strictly Catholic thing. It is a universally human thing the Church has a view on.
Taqqiya is a strictly Muslim thing.
>>984807
>Protestant Buzzwords
>He thinks this is an argument
>>984807
>There is no apology
http://www.delawareonline.com/story/news/local/2015/09/27/pope-apologizes-sex-abuse-scandal/72946870/
>no desire to reform
http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/what-the-church-has-done-about-sex-abuse-88665/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+catholicnewsagency%2Fdailynews+%28CNA+Daily+News%29&utm_term=daily+news
>>984870
Standing up and giving a speech than going back down and continueing to do the exact same policies that enabled the rape in the first place isn't a desire to reform. As I said when a school discovers it is filled with child rapists it opens up it's documents to the police so they can find all the evidense nessiary. They send those accused to court When the Catholic church discovers it's filled with rape-enablers (and their very Pope is suspected of being one) they try to close off documents. They hide the accused behind diplomatic immunity. Most likely if they actually opened their files we would find something even more disgusting and most likely if their Pope went to court he would be found guilty. Only the guilty have something to hide.
Only a cuckthilic could think obstruction of justice represents reformation.
>>984940
>I will only be satisfied when all Catholics kill themselves
>and even then I still won't shut up about it
You don't really care about any true progress, healing or reforms in any capacity, you just want to spout anger at an easy target based on one justification you wouldn't even drop if absolutley "perfect" amends were made and any priest accused, guilty or not, is defrocked and executed and every diocese is pretty much co-run by the local police. Even then you would still rail, even then you would still cry "it's not good enough."
And if you truly cared, you would march over to your local diocesan office and apply explicitly to help repair damage and prevent further damage.
But again, you don't care truly because this is just convenient ammunition you can use to justify your existing hatreds.
>>973916
You what m8?
Human rights were invented by British protestants.
>>985005
The amends that I said are things that normal orginzations already do without being asked to. All you are doing is saying that the Catholics have a lower standard of morality than literally every other organization that has ever had a sex scandal. And appearently if I have a problem with them being the bottem tier of moral conduct it makes me a hater.
>>985005
It's not an incidental problem. The Vatican you refuse to see clearly is an evil institution that goes so far as to openly worship satan inside the Vatican. Raping children is luciferian, and done by Vatican envoys. Stop ignoring everything against the Whore and stop judging her by your nice little helpful local church.
>>985196
The Church will endure to the end of time. Christ himself promised as much. Anyone who calls the Vatican evil is a liar and a heretic.
>>985223
Her destruction will come in one hour, just as prophesied.
>>985229
Prophesied by whom? Heretics and schismatics? Why should anyone listen to them? They are perpetually in error.
>>985250
No, by John the Revelator.
“The kings of the earth who committed fornication and lived luxuriously with her will weep and lament for her, when they see the smoke of her burning, 10 standing at a distance for fear of her torment, saying, ‘Alas, alas, that great city Babylon, that mighty city! For in one hour your judgment has come.’
Rome is Babylon
1 Peter 5:13 She who is in Babylon, elect together with you, greets you; and so does Mark my son.
The harlot is a city set upon seven hills
evelation 17:18 And the woman whom you saw is that great city which reigns over the kings of the earth.”
>>985260
>Protestants interpreting Scripture
>ever
A complete joke.
>>985270
The Whore of Babylon admitting she's the Whore of Babylon.
A complete joke.
>>985270
>Those bible verses don't mean anything!
kek
>>985276
My Church was founded by Christ at the Last Supper. When was yours founded?
>>985270
>Peter doesn't know what he's talking about!
kek
>>985270
>Just because Rome is known as the city on seven hills, and just because the pope literally crowned the kings of Europe for 1,260 years, doesn't mean anything!
>>985280
You're in the Church of Constantine, a sun worshiper, founded in 325 AD.
You're not in the church that matters.
>>985280
>Unironically posts a picture of the False Prophet of Mystery Babylon.
>Claims to have a connection with Peter.
>>985280
You know what's retarded is that the church that matters didn't even start, couldn't even have started, until the Day of Pentecost, 54 days later.
>>985290
Constantine didn't start Roman Catholicism! I swear! It was his good friend and mentor, Arius!
>me, not knowing your history
kek
>>985291
lel, no, the Last Supper is when the clergy was founded. Pentecost was deeply important, that I'll grant you, but the Church was started on Holy Thursday.
>>985184
So what have you personally done to enact change? To let those procedures you champion become commonplace in child sex abuse cases among clergy?
I am not saying we have a lower standard of morality in that post, I'm saying you simply don't care about any reform or restitution in any capacity because you just want a justification for your anger. If 50 years from now results in perfect legal action for these cases that rivals all other cases of child abuse where if a child was abused by a priest then their case will be handled faster and better than if they were abused by a teacher or child care provider, I'm certain you'd still hold the Boston abuse scandal over the Church, both clergy AND congregation, and still shout hate against them propping up that injustice as justification, regardless if amends were made.
>>985196
>Protestant Buzzwords
Let's take it from the top:
First of all, "Lucifer" as a name for the Devil is relatively young and even as far back as Augustine of Hippo's lifetime, Lucifer wasn't the name of the devil. This naming only came about around the time of the the King Jame's Bible's translation. Pic related are 3 Lucifers who were also early Christians. That "oh the pope prayed to Lucifer!" thing was from a rite of prayer that existed LONG before the KJV.
And second, if anything, calling the devil Lucifer is an mocking insult to him because he lost that role of Light Bearer to Mary, who with her Fiat, literally bore The Light of The World as her only Son, Jesus.
>>985293
>>985229
>one hour
And one hour later from the time of this post, nothing will happen.
Because all Protestant prophecies are fraudulent.
>>985260
>Rome is the city that sits on 7 hills
So is Minneapolis. And modern Italy is as much the "Whore of Babylon" as the Catholic Church is.
Heck, considering the Vatican rests on and is named for a hill ADJACENT to the Roman 7, the modern Roman suburb of Ostia is equally the Whore.
>>985284
Only a historically illiterate retard believes Constantine founded Christianity let alone Catholicism. Because, for starters, that doesn't even account for the Orthodox Church. It's literally on par with saying all Christians just recycled Jesus from some random other god.
>>985293
Considering how Catholicism denounces Arianism, I still don't know why you expect to be taken seriously.
You christians sure love complaining about "fedoras" but I see a lot more hatred between your different sects than I do from pagans or atheists.
>>973916
Human Rights lost their older, "objective" grounding and became a subjective wishy washy doctrine that's politicized to boot.
I hope Michel Villey's book about the origins of human rights would be translated into English at some point, it's quite the gem.
>>985300
Nope. You don't matter, your church doesn't matter, and nobody is going to remember you pagans. Jesus was crucified on Thursday, or Jesus is a liar.
>>985353
So now Mary is the devil's wife. You pagans never cease to amaze me how low you'll go to blaspheme the Lord.
Your idiot Jerome gave us "Lucifer"; the Hebrew is Heylel ben Shakar, Shining One, Son of the Dawn. Not Light Bearer.
>>985402
Her destruction will take one hour. Not commence in one hour. Holy mackerel it's like you're allergic to the bible.
All prophecy is from God, and it's all true. Much to the future horror of all papists.
Minneapolis did not rule over the kings of the earth in the day of John the Revelator; that was 95 AD. Do you see how Minneapolis could not be the city mentioned in 95 AD? No?
Rome is Babylon.
Roman Catholicism is Mystery Babylon.
The Vatican is the Whore of Babylon. That the Whore has an apartment outside the city is known.
The pope is the False Prophet of Babylon.
Constanine founded the Roman Catholic Church, which has nothing to do with Jesus Christ whatsoever.
Constantine raised Arius up in political power, and attempted to force all Christians to ally themselves with Arius. maybe read a history book.
>>987459
Catholics have murdered over 68,000,000 Christians and Jews. The antipathy is real.
>>978508
It's kind of silly, since it allows people to lie in spirit but not in letter. It may as well just give them explicit permission to lie outright rather than force them to just try and awkwardly mislead people.
There's nothing really wrong with it morally, of course. There are plenty of situations where lying could be morally justified, but rules like this could be easily abused.
