Vatican to Muslims: practice what you preach

[tocqueville]

By Tom Heneghan, Religion Editor
Thu Feb 23, 12:55 PM ET

PARIS (Reuters) - After backing calls by Muslims for respect for their religion in the Mohammad cartoons row, the Vatican is now urging Islamic countries to reciprocate by showing more tolerance toward their Christian minorities.

....................

Vatican prelates have been concerned by recent killings of two Catholic priests in Turkey and Nigeria. Turkish media linked the death there to the cartoons row. At least 146 Christians and Muslims have died in five days of religious riots in Nigeria.

"If we tell our people they have no right to offend, we have to tell the others they have no right to destroy us," Cardinal Angelo Sodano, the Vatican's Secretary of State (prime minister), told journalists in Rome.

"We must always stress our demand for reciprocity in political contacts with authorities in Islamic countries and, even more, in cultural contacts," Foreign Minister Archbishop Giovanni Lajolo told the daily Corriere della Sera.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060223/wl_nm/religion_vatican_muslims_dc

[Demeter]

1. My Irony Meter Just Pinned and Broke

Theologian, heal thyself!

[malaise]

3. Mine shattered into tiny pieces n/t

[WritingIsMyReligion]

56. Mine exploded into a bout of laughter.

Hypocrisy, anyone?

:rofl:

:eyes:

[trotsky]

60. Best response.

LOL :thumbsup:

[Selatius]

2. Religion...

Sometimes I wonder if it does far more harm to humanity than helps.

[malaise]

4. You still wonder

Religion is the worst evil among many evils.

[WritingIsMyReligion]

54. Only sometimes?

;)

[SpiralHawk]

5. Pot to kettle: clean up your act

eom

[Donald Ian Rankin]

10. That's a big exaggeration.

Catholicism as a religion has many flaws, but it's nothing like as oppressive or unpleasant as Islam, especially not if you measure by the actual interpretation by its followers rather than by some "platonic form".

I think this call makes perfect sense, although I don't expect it to be much heeded.

[SpiralHawk]

13. Have you made an Inquisition into Catholic hypocricy

I have made the Inquisition, personally and scholastically

I hope my view: pot calling kettle black

[DemBones DemBones]

15. You made the Inquisition?

So why are you blaming Catholics for it?

By the way, the word is "hypocrisy" and it is often displayed by "liberals" who have forgiven Germany, Japan, Russia, North Vietnam, North Korea, and all the Islamic radicals who have been, or still are, a threat to the lives of people living in the United States, yet constantly rag on the Roman Catholic Church about the Inquisition, which happened centuries ago.

[arwalden]

21. I'd Hardly Think That Those Countries Are A Threat To Me Anymore...

... yet the Catholic Church and it's continual insistance on fanning the flames of intolerance until the conflegrate into violence DOES remain a CONSTANT and very REAL threat to me.

I think it's a little naive for anyone to compare one's forgiveness of Germany, Japan (etc) with the former and current actions of the Catholic Church.

[catbert836]

16. "not as oppresive and unpleasant as Islam"

Of course, because all forms of Islam are oppresive and unpleasant. I know some DUers who might disagree with you on that.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

44. No, but a sufficiently high proportion are

that I think it's legitimate to say

"Islam is oppressive and unpleasant; there are a few, mostly fairly heterodox counterexamples but they're the exception rather than the rule"

rather than

"Some forms of Islam are oppressive and unpleasant, some aren't, the term "Islam" when used without qualifiers could equally well be taken to refer to either".

There are liberal strands of Islam; they have tens of millions of followers, arguably more depending on where you draw your lines, almost all of those posting on DU will presumably come from those. That's still a very small majority of the total number of self-proclaimed Muslims.

The Koran contains instructions on how to run a society; many of those instructions are very bad ones indeed; far worse than the corresponding (themselves bad) instructions in Catholic scripture and tradition (especially if you avoid canards about the Catholics wanting to implement the Levitical purity code). Not all self-proclaimed Muslims want to see those instructions implemented, but enough do that I think it's still fair to refer to them as part of Islam.

[catbert836]

47. However,

The Catholic Church has managed to be pretty oppresive even to this day. Not allowing the faithful to use condoms and its prejudice against gays come to mind.
As far as Islam goes, I think you could learn a lot about the Koran's "bad instructions" from our Muslim DUers, especially in their DU group.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

53. I'm not sure I could.

I suspect most of DU's Muslims are much like most of DU's Christians - much nicer and better people than more mainstream practitioners of their respective faiths, but not reliable sources of information on what the official or consensus views are.

While I'm sure that a lot of them are very well-informed, the little knowledge of Islam I have suggests that much of what I've seen Muslims posting on DU about their faith, while not factually inaccurate, is misleading as a guide to what the majority of Muslims believe, and what the "true" teachings of Islam (assuming you accept the notion of there being a platonic form of a religion distinct from what its followers actually do, which I'm inclined not to) are.

The same is true of Christians, to an arguably even greater extent, especially given the relative density of Christian and Muslim posts - if the only Christians I'd encountered had been on DU, I'd regard Christianity as a very good thing indeed.

[catbert836]

66. Then why

do you insist on defending Catholicism? Just asking.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

67. Because I think too many people go *too* far in attacking it.

and that therefor in the interests of accuracy what needs doing more of is defending it, not attacking it. I want to see the Catholic church (and all other religious positions, and non-religious opinions, come to that) condemned exactly as far as they deserve to be condemned and no further.

I find myself defending Christianity in its various flavours a great deal on DU, despite not liking it, because I think that a lot more people go further, often a lot further, than is justified when criticising it than don't go far enough or actively defend it. I also do my best to point out how unpleasant a religion Islam is, and that Hinduism, Judaism etc are also far from perfect. In most other contexts, the positions are reversed - DU has a strong anti-Christian and pro-everything else (especially atheism and Islam) bias, whereas in British society as a whole the opposite is clearly true.

It's depressing, but I think fairly clearly true, that an awful lot of DUers are strongly influenced in their value judgements by the fact that most white American Conservatives, the people they spend most of their time fighting, are Christians, and as such tend to assume that Christianity is the worst of all possible religions. It's not; it's just perspective that makes it look that way - things closer up always seem bigger.

I also worry that there's an even clearer bias against Catholicism than against other forms of Christianity, because there are fewer Catholic than Protestant DUers and because Catholicism looks more "establishment", but I'm much less certain about that.

Homophobia is *definately* a fair thing to condemn Catholicism for in general, but not in the context of a comparison between Catholicism and Islam.

Paedophilia is *not* a fair thing to condemn Catholicism for, because it's neither the fault of a non-trivial number of Catholics, or an official part or natural consequence of Catholic doctrine - exactly the same reasons its not fair to condemn Islam for terrorism, although even more strongly applicable.

[Critters2]

70. I disagree

I think peodphilia is a consequence of church doctrine. First, there's the issue of celibacy, which causes those with healthy sexual attitudes to be not attracted to the priesthood, making it necessary to attract and support those with immature and unhealthy sexual appetites. Then, there's the strong hierarchical and secretive nature of the church's structure, which enabled the ongoing abuse, with no structure to stop it. I also believe that a part of the problem is that priests and bishops are not parts of families that include children, and thus lack empathy for the victims of the abuse.

And before you insist that other churches do the same things, please know that my church has a zero-tolerance policy toward sexual abuse and enforces this policy. Recent events in my area (Chicago and Joliet) demonstrate that the Catholic Church still tolerates and facilitates sexual abuse of children.

[ThJ]

74. yeah, right....

And yet, what of all those priests who do not have a problem with celibacy? If pedophilia is a consequence of doctrine, then one would expect all priests, or at least more of them, to be pedophiles, yet this is not the case.

And yes, there are as many cases of Protestant abuse as Catholic abuse, so don't become too uprighteous. That alone should show pedophilia is not a consequence of Church doctrine, but of an individual's own issues.

The Catholic Church does deserve to be criticised for not acting in disciplining these priests and not being more forthcoming about the issue, but to suggest that pedophilia is a consequence of Church doctrine is absurd.

[ThJ]

73. This is ridiculous...

The Catholic Church does not allow people to use condoms? Does it physically prevent the use of condoms and birth control? No, the Church teaches against the use of such things, but it does not prevent people from using them. The Church also teaches abstinence as opposed to sexual license, but they do not prevent people from having sex.

And why would you expect the Catholic Church to accept something the Bible explicitly forbids, i.e., homosexuality? I'm quite sure Islam is also not tolerant of homosexuality, probably less so than Catholicism.

Has the Catholic Church participated in evil in the past: yes, I don't think anyone can deny that; yet the Catholic Church has also made great strides in promoting social justice and liberty (ever read Vatican 2?). The Church has not been static and neither is history, which makes the harping on the Inquisition and the "pot v kettle" argument only so much hogwash.

At this point in time, the Catholic Church, as a promoter of peace, liberty, and social justice, can with all sincerity call upon Muslims, as Islam is purported to be a religion of peace, to practice peace.

[catbert836]

79. I'm sure you would agree

that the Church has a huge amount of power over the faithful. Telling people condoms are against God's law does, in fact, lead many people not to use condoms.
I wouldn't expect the church to be lenient towards homosexuality, but just because the Bible is opposed to homosexuality doesn't mean it's right for the Church to do.
The Church as a promoter of peace, justice, and social values... :rofl:

[ThJ]

82. Where do you get that impression?

If the Catholic Church truly had the power make people stop using condoms based on their teachings, then why does the Church have such a problem with tithing as well as other things.

Decisions about whether or not to use condoms involve other factors aside from the Catholic Church's teaching on the subject.
___________________________________________________________

You're asking the Church to accept homosexuality, not be lenient. The Church is "lenient." They are not persecuting homosexuals, nor preaching that people should do so. They merely teach that homosexuality is a sin, just as they teach adultery is a sin. Why is expressing their opinion somehow intolerant of homosexuals? Tolerance does not mean acceptance of particular behavior. Should they be accepting of adultery as well? Are they intolerant of adulterers if they express the belief that adultery is sin.

And obviously, you have not read Vatican 2 or heard of liberation theology.

[catbert836]

83. I have read Vatican 2, and I have heard of liberation theology.

I'm a huge fan of liberation theology and its proponents, such as Oscar Romero. The funny thing about that in relation to the Church is that John Paul II condemned it, and it doesn't seem to have had a huge effect on the whole Church apparatus.
Maybe I am asking for the Church to accept homosexuality. But is that so wrong? Maybe it's time the Church gets into the modern world. As for expressing their opinion, it's not the only thing they've been doing. But that's beside the point. As a Christian orginization, the Church should not be so quick to judge homosexuals. What was that thing Jesus said about judging again? If you want to know some homosexual opinions of the Church, feel free to ask around DU. I'm sure our local community of them will tell you the Church is being intolerant towards them by saying that their love is sinful, and thus driving them away when they're supposed to be an open, tolerant, non-judgemental Christian organization.
Tithing does not really compare to the Church's teachings on condoms. First of all, the Church has a huge amount of wealth that it's gained through the years, and secondly, they don't have an active tithing policy, like the Mormons do. Yes, I know that decisions on whether or not to use a condom involve other factors than the church, but consider this: You're a not-too-well-educated African peasant, also a devout Catholic, as many Africans are. Since you haven't learned critical thinking skills very well, wouldn't you be more inclined to accept the church's teaching on condoms, rather than figuring it out for yourself? Probably you won't even consider birth control if the Church tells you it's a sin.

[ThJ]

84. Vatican 2 and Liberation Theology

So, if you've read Vatican 2 and Pope John XXIII's encyclicals, then you can see why I would state the Church promotes social justice, peace, etc. Does the Church always succeed in its promotion of these ideals? Probably not.

I personally don't agree with libertation theology, but it represents another aspect of belief which in the same spirit of Vatican 2.

Maybe I am asking for the Church to accept homosexuality. But is that so wrong?
Is it wrong for you to ask? No, but you shouldn't expect them to heed you question. The Church does not have to accept homosexuals or invite them to serve in the Church, if they are practicing homosexuals (if the person is a homosexual, but do not act on their urges, then they would be no different than the heterosexual who chooses not to act on their urges).

As a Christian orginization, the Church should not be so quick to judge homosexuals. What was that thing Jesus said about judging again?
Is the Church judging them specifically? The Church is teaching a doctrine which has been preached since the inception of Christianity, particularly by the Apostle Paul. If the Church is to remain true to Scripture, then they have little choice but to teach that the act of homosexuality is a sin, as the Bible states.

If homosexuals feel judged by this, then perhaps they should rethink their actions, but teaching that homosexuality is a sin, does not mean the Catholic Church should not minister to homosexuals; however, again, the Church does not have to be accepting of their lifestyle. Just because you are tolerant of something, it does not follow you have to accept it.

Also, Christ's teaching on judgement do not end with judge not, lest you be judged; He also said to judge righteous judgement, because with what judgement you judge, you shall be judged.

As for the condom/birth control debate, the official position of the Church is opposed to their use; however, this is not the final word. Their are Catholics who ask people to use some common sense, etc. And while the Church may officially be opposed, I believe the Church can offer practical advice (something I've been thinking about after re-reading some Aquinas), such not being promiscuous, etc. (because it's not just a lack of condom use, but promiscuity which is an issue as well), and I think there are Catholic people and organisations who do this, although they may not be heard.

[catbert836]

86. Sorry I took so long in responding.

Anyways.

First of all, I think John XXIII's encyclicals and Vatican II brought the Church a long way, but there's still a lot of work to be done. I hope that sometime in my lifetime, the church will adress these issues we've been talking about, and establish firmly their position as a promoter of peace and social justice. This probably won't happen with this pope, though.

Sure the Church can offer practical advice about sex, but by opposing birth control, they put the faithful in a dangerous situation. The fact is, as we know, people are going to have sex whether the Church wants them to or not, and I personally think it's rather foolish of the Church to ignore that. By labeling birth control a sin, they put it out of bounds to many of the faithful, as I've demonstrated. Partially as a result is the out-of-control third world population, which in turn leads to starvation, etc.

"If homosexuals feel judged by this, perhaps they should rethink their actions". The church's judgement does not only have the effect of excluding homosexuals, it also contributes to the anti-gay attitude of our culture. I'm sure you'd agree that we're at a bad place when gays can't find toleration in our society, and the church contributes to that effect. Maybe it is unrealistic to ask the church to tolerate homosexuals, but the fact they refuse to do so, in my mind, makes them a backward, conservative organization. Just because Paul (possibly a repressed homosexual himself) preached against homosexuality does not mean the Church is right in accepting that doctrine. I think pretty much any Catholic, including Benedict XVI himself, would say that the center of Catholicism is Jesus. Maybe they should focus more on him, and less on Paul.

[ThJ]

87. No problem...

First of all, I think John XXIII's encyclicals and Vatican II brought the Church a long way, but there's still a lot of work to be done.
Agreed. There is always more work to be and more progress to be done. Unfortunately, we're no where near perfect.

The fact is, as we know, people are going to have sex whether the Church wants them to or not, and I personally think it's rather foolish of the Church to ignore that.
Also agreed, which I think the Church needs to start taking a more practical approach to this issue.

By labeling birth control a sin, they put it out of bounds to many of the faithful, as I've demonstrated.
Over the last month, I've been reading Dietrich Bonhoeffer's Ethics, and I just got to part where he discusses birth control. I found his criticisms very enlightening. In light of us being good stewards, he notes that responsibility is key not only in other areas of our lifes, but also over reproduction. He also notes that such rigorism as promoted by the Church could lead to pharisaism or a turning away from the Church altogether, and that the doctrine creates an unnatural state of marriage, because it does not allow for bodily union, if it is rigorously enforced.

I'm sure you'd agree that we're at a bad place when gays can't find toleration in our society, and the church contributes to that effect.
Totally, and if the Church contributes to this, then that needs to be changed. The message of the Church is Love (the commandment of Christ), and as such it has to be inclusive in its ministry; however, I don't think the Church should be required to accept homosexual behavior. Catholics, and Christians in general, should not shun homosexuals, but talk to them about the Love of Christ. If the person chooses to engage in homosexuality, then that is between that person and God and is nobody else's business, and they should be judged/shunned because of it.

[davidinalameda]

89. using a condom or any form of birth control is considered a sin

that to me suggests that the Catholic Church does its best to prevent it's members from using them

by calling something a sin goes pretty far in preventing people from doing whatever

[Critters2]

65. Tell it to a sex abuse

victim. I'm guessing they feel pretty damned oppressed by the Catholic Church. But I keep forgetting, we mustn't talk about the victims. It upsets the bishops.

[WritingIsMyReligion]

55. LOL--Now THAT is spot-on!

:rofl:

:yourock:

[woodsprite]

6. Excuse me, doesn't the Catholic church preach celibacy for priests? n/t

[Name removed]

7. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[tocqueville]

8. the anticatholic bias on DU is incredible

1) what's the story is about

Reciprocity -- allowing Christian minorities the same rights as Muslims generally have in Western countries, such as building houses of worship or practicing religion freely -- is at the heart of Vatican diplomacy toward Muslim states.

Vatican diplomats argue that limits on Christians in some Islamic countries are far harsher than restrictions in the West that Muslims decry, such as France's ban on headscarves in state schools.

Saudi Arabia bans all public expression of any non-Muslim religion and sometimes arrests Christians even for worshipping privately. Pakistan allows churches to operate but its Islamic laws effectively deprive Christians of many rights.

Both countries are often criticized at the United Nations Human Rights Commission for violating religious freedoms.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060223/wl_nm/religion_vatican_muslims_dc

Question : what's wrong with that ?

2) "Child rapers" :

Sex abuse spans spectrum of churches

By Mark Clayton | Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor

Despite headlines focusing on the priest pedophile problem in the Roman Catholic Church, most American churches being hit with child sexual-abuse allegations are Protestant, and most of the alleged abusers are not clergy or staff, but church volunteers.

These are findings from national surveys by Christian Ministry Resources (CMR), a tax and legal-advice publisher serving more than 75,000 congregations and 1,000 denominational agencies nationwide.

CMR's annual surveys of about 1,000 churches nationwide have asked about sexual abuse since 1993. They're a remarkable window on a problem that lurked largely in the shadows of public awareness until the Catholic scandals arose.

The surveys suggest that over the past decade, the pace of child-abuse allegations against American churches has averaged 70 a week. The surveys registered a slight downward trend in reported abuse starting in 1997, possibly a result of the introduction of preventive measures by churches.

"I think the CMR numbers are striking, yet quite reasonable," says Anson Shupe, an Indiana University professor who's written books about church abuse. "To me it says Protestants are less reluctant to come forward because they don't put their clergy on as high a pedestal as Catholics do with their priests."

At least 70 incidents a week

Dr. Shupe suggests the 70 allegations-per-week figure actually could be higher, because underreporting is common. He discovered this in 1998 while going door to door in Dallas-Ft. Worth communities where he asked 1,607 families if they'd experienced abuse from those within their church. Nearly 4 percent said they had been victims of sexual abuse by clergy. Child sexual abuse was part of that, but not broken out, he says.
_____________________________________________________________________________
(note the amount of child abuse by Catholics is considered to be around 1.5%)
______________________________________________________________________________

James Cobble, executive director of CMR, who oversees the survey, says the data show that child sex-abuse happens broadly across all denominations– and that clergy aren't the major offenders.

http://www.csmonitor.com/2002/0405/p01s01-ussc.html



this above is talking for itself. Child abuse happens in all denominations, and mostly not by the clergy.

but the Catholics are ALWAYS blamed, when in reality the abuse among other Xian Churches is the same if not higher (specially in the US, since those denominations are overrepresented compared to other countries)

so I do wonder who are the assholes in this story and what child abuse has to do in a discussion about frredom of religion in Muslim countries. And what I know of, the Vatican isn't excuting Imams, everytime some Christian hostage is beheaded.

[DemBones DemBones]

14. Blatant Catholic bashing is the fashion at DU

and at all other allegedly progressive or liberal boards I've ever read.

Because of the hate expressed against our faith, we no longer contribute to the Democratic Party and won't be volunteering to work on campaigns, either. Knowing what my fellow Democrats think of my faith has shown me that the average so-called liberal or progressive is a person full of hate toward Catholicism and unable to think rationally. The GOP at least pretends to respect Catholicism and that's why the Dems have been losing more and more Catholics to the Republicans. I won't vote Republican but I've had it with hateful Democrats.

By the way, not only is clergy sex abuse a problem in every religion, but cover-ups are also a problem. Historically, very few employers have wanted it to become public knowledge that an employee is a pervert.

Also, the vast majority of abuse is perpetrated by fathers, older brothers, uncles, cousins, stepfathers, mother's boyfriends, neighbors and family friends, etc..

[catbert836]

22. Oh, spare me.

The Democratic Party is rather religious, at least from my viewpoint. Athiests and agnostics are treated like the retarded nephew of the Dems in most cases. If you want a career in politics, you won't get elected unless you can talk comfortably about your faith in God. You're deluding yourself if you think athiests are in charge of the party.
And i'd say that Catholic voters are heading to the GOP because their bishops tell them it's a sin to vote pro-choice, not because they can't tolerate criticism from a very small minority of the party.

[Goblinmonger]

23. Two things:

1.

2.

[Critters2]

62. !

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

[Donald Ian Rankin]

68. Call me slow if you will, but I don't get it.

The first one is obvious, but what about the second set? A woman I don't recognise, someone who I think may be Mia Farrow in "Rosemary's Baby", and a river? Is it a rebus, or what?

[Critters2]

71. Cry Mia River

[Goblinmonger]

75. You don't recognize Mrs. Alito?

Wow, how did you miss that cry fest during the confirmation.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

76. By being several thousand miles away

I'm English, not American. I heard about Mrs Alito breaking down on DU, but other than that it didn't impact at all on the news organs I read.

[Goblinmonger]

77. Ahhh

You are the better for not having lived through it.

[Phx_Dem]

26. DU dems

I hope your interaction w/dems involves more than DU members, they do seem to be on the left edge of things. I imagine the situation is the same at most "liberal/progressive" blogs etc.

personally I think the Catholic church is well suited to champion human rights for it's followers, despite the fact that myself and many other people disagree with certain Church policies (like contraception).

Good luck with everything.

[Critters2]

80. The Catholic church could start by championing the rights

of children to be safe, and of abuse victims to see their abusers prosecuted. When I see these things happening, I'll believe the Catholic church knows anything about human rights.

[WhollyHeretic]

31. Blatant homophobia is the fashion at the Vatican

Sorry but just because it's your religion doesn't mean people can't criticize it. I will criticize any organization that fosters hatred or has a debacle like the priest pedophilia and cover-ups.

Get over the persecution complex and take a look at reality http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Catholic_leaders_and_politicians Do you see all the Democratic leaders on there? Tell me again how you're persecuted in this party... :cry:

[Goblinmonger]

34. and compare that to this list of atheist leaders

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_atheists#Politics_.26_Law

the only fucking American on there is Clarence Darrow. :woohoo:

[tocqueville]

36. because blatant homophobia isn't the rule in other denominations ?

the RC shares exactly the same crap about gays, sex and abortion that the majority of the non RC fundies. The positive is that they respect the separation of Church and State and skip the creationist crap.

It doesn't matter, "they are pedophiles" and "cover it". Well I say that they are probably somewhat less "pedophile" than the majority of the other denominations (serious surveys show that), which - them - cover up the thing completely and even go to court to fight the right to be exposed... see below

Evangelical Churches Resist Ohio Abuse-Reporting Bill

First Amendment Center
February 20, 2004

COLUMBUS, Ohio — Several fundamentalist churches oppose a bill that would require the clergy to report child abuse, saying the legislation is an unnecessary intrusion into the separation of church and state.

The bill, supported by mainstream churches including Roman Catholics and Methodists, easily passed the Senate last year but is stalled in a House committee because of the ministers' concerns.

Pastors of independent Baptist churches and evangelical congregations around Ohio say the requirement raises privacy concerns about pastors' approach to counseling and even church teachings on corporal punishment.

"If corporal discipline is considered abuse and the pastor preaches that the Bible teaches corporal discipline, what should the pastor do if the parishioners follow his preaching?" said Daniel Whisner, pastor of the Church at Chapel Hill in Mount Vernon. "Should he then turn them into the state for abuse?"

http://www.firstamendmentcenter.org/news.aspx?id=12728

talk about hypocricy

[WhollyHeretic]

37. So the Catholic Church's homophobia is OK because other people do it?

That is some screwed up logic. The cover-up and pedophilia is OK with you as well since other people do it? What a moral sinkhole you live in.

How about a link for those "serious surveys?"

[tocqueville]

38. IT'S YOUR "LOGIC " !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I never said that the cover up of the one EXCUSES the deeds of the others.

But the FACT is that as soon the world catholic shows up on DU, you can be sure of some "pedo" comment. The others are NEVER MENTIONED, they "DON'T EXIST", while in reality they are maybe even bigger predators since their lifestyle allows them even to predate not only on children, but on adults. And there the COVER UP IS TOTAL and even worse, when exposed, they go to court to FIGHT THE RIGHT TO BE EXPOSED AT ALL (I bet Alito is going to give them right, good Catholic as he is).

The position about child abuse in Church among many DUers is the example of a BLATANT DOUBLE-STANDARD or at least of ignorance. If you have to fight them, fight them ALL, but don't single a single group. Or else something is rotten.


Here are the links, there are more. Read and weep.

http://www.csmonitor.com/2002/0405/p01s01-ussc.html

Sex abuse spans spectrum of churches

By Mark Clayton | Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor

Despite headlines focusing on the priest pedophile problem in the Roman Catholic Church, most American churches being hit with child sexual-abuse allegations are Protestant, and most of the alleged abusers are not clergy or staff, but church volunteers.
These are findings from national surveys by Christian Ministry Resources (CMR), a tax and legal-advice publisher serving more than 75,000 congregations and 1,000 denominational agencies nationwide.


CMR's annual surveys of about 1,000 churches nationwide have asked about sexual abuse since 1993. They're a remarkable window on a problem that lurked largely in the shadows of public awareness until the Catholic scandals arose.

The surveys suggest that over the past decade, the pace of child-abuse allegations against American churches has averaged 70 a week. The surveys registered a slight downward trend in reported abuse starting in 1997, possibly a result of the introduction of preventive measures by churches.

"I think the CMR numbers are striking, yet quite reasonable," says Anson Shupe, anIndiana University professor who's written books about church abuse. "To me it says Protestants are less reluctant to come forward because they don't put their clergy on as high a pedestal as Catholics do with their priests."

At least 70 incidents a week

_____________________________________________________

http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_rob_kall_051111_bush_supporting_evan.htm

Another problem within the Evangelical churches is they have tried to block laws requiring the reporting of sexual abuse cases, according to an article by Marci Hamilton, in Findlaw. She writes
"The evangelicals' argument, however, is that if a pastor must report known child abuse, then members won't confide in him. In other words, let the children suffer so the pedophile can speak to his pastor worry-free.

If we knew a lot less about childhood sexual abuse than we do now, this concern might carry some weight. But the truth is that religious groups have been horrendous at addressing child abuse when they learn about it. The balance between making sure ministers hear everything their members want to say and rescuing the children enduring child abuse is a no-brainer. The Catholic Church's infamous see-no-evil transfer-the-pedophile-elsewhere police is perhaps the most blatant example, but it is far from the only example, as new victims emerge on a regular basis.

There was a time when each religious institution stood for its individual beliefs in the public square, and fought what it believed was morally wrong - even if the moral wrong came from another religious institution. It seems that time is gone. One waits in vain for the religious institution that will stand up to either the Catholics or the evangelicals in these battles over much-needed changes to childhood sexual abuse laws. Their silence is deafening.

http://www.davidmacd.com/catholic/priest_sexual_abuse_cases.htm

A list of non-Catholic ministers charged in court with abuse is here. In this post Freudian world, sex scandal has hit many major institutions including, presidencies, public schools, and minor league sports. God save us.

The incidence of abuse by teachers is even more staggering, as a 1988 study reported in The Handbook on Sexual Abuse of Children reveals. It reported that "One in four girls, and one in six boys, is sexually abused by age 18." A 1991 study revealed that "17.7 percent of males who graduated from high school, and 82.2 percent of females, reported sexual harassment by faculty or staff during their years in school. Fully 13.5 percent said they had sexual intercourse with their teacher,"

A survey by the Washington Post found that "Over the last four decades, less than 1.5 percent of the estimated 60,000 or more men who have served in the Catholic clergy have been accused of child sexual abuse." ...Dr. Thomas Plante, a psychologist at Santa Clara University, found that '80 to 90% of all priests who in fact abuse minors have sexually engaged with adolescent boys, not prepubescent children,'" the report continues, underscoring the fact that the ordination of priests with homosexual tendencies may be the real problem. ... In 2002, Christian Ministry Resources reported on national surveys they conducted which concluded that "Despite headlines focusing on the priest pedophile problem in the Roman Catholic Church, most American churches being hit with child sexual-abuse allegations are Protestant." Lifesite News, Feb 6 2004

http://www.reformation.com/

Welcome to a collection of news reports of ministers sexually abusing children:


ALL Protestant denominations - 838 Ministers

147 Baptist Ministers

251 "Bible" Church Ministers (fundamentalist/evangelical)

140 Anglican/Episcopalian Ministers

38 Lutheran Ministers

46 Methodist Ministers

19 Presbyterian Ministers

197 various Church Ministers




Happy now ?

[WhollyHeretic]

40. OMG YOU CAN USE CAPS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

You were the one who pointed out other Churches had the same problems as if that excused the Catholic Church. The Catholic Church brought the pedophilia issue on itself with how it treated the problem and continues to treat it. I'm not saying it's not a problem in other churches and I have no problem pointing out problems in any religion.

I will call out any and all homophobic groups, not just the Catholic Church. It's not my fault that you choose to support this homophobic group but I will not stay silent about any group fostering hatred.

[tocqueville]

41. I don't support any homophobic group FYI

I just point out that the standard is (the same original topic has been posted again) :

Replies to this thread

The gall of the Vatican is unbelievable jumpoffdaplanet Feb-24-06 05:07 AM #1
What did they say in this case that was wrong? QC Feb-24-06 05:08 AM #2
jumpoffdaplanet (60 posts) Fri Feb-24-06 05:07 AM

Response to Original message
1. The gall of the Vatican is unbelievable
They protect pedos for decades, and then have the nerve to preach at another religion?

Alert Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
QC (1000+ posts) Fri Feb-24-06 05:08 AM
Response to Reply #1
2. What did they say in this case that was wrong?
One would expect progressives to agree with the need to recognize the human rights of religious minorities.

________________________________________________________________________________________

and I state again the following :

- the Catholic Clergy is no more pedo than the other denominations
- they don't don't cover up more than the others (and it's very difficult for them to do it today)

BUT THEY ARE THE ONLY ONES INSTINCTIVELY JUMPED ON

it's called bias

and bias is wrong, and in that case it only serves Bush's pals, besides that it is dishonest.

[WhollyHeretic]

46. Hey, did you ever stop to think that maybe it's not bias but the facts

that the Catholic Church is the largest, most powerful, and most recognizable form of Christianity are the reasons it garners the most criticism? Nah, that'd be much to reasonable, it's much easier just to cry persecution...

[Critters2]

63. So you DON'T support the Catholic Church?

Cuz it sure seems like you do.

I'm confused.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

69. Depends what you mean by "support", I think.

There's a difference between "believing something is good, and wanting it to prosper", and "believing something, while bad, is not as bad as it's being described as by others, and wanting it not to be condemned more than is fair".

[arwalden]

42. Oh Brother... Give Me A Fucking Break!

<< The GOP at least pretends to respect Catholicism >>

Uh... the way that the Vatican "respects" homosexuals and altar boys?

<< I won't vote Republican but I've had it with hateful Democrats. >>

And I've had it with naive blind nitwits who continually look the other way, make excuses, deny, defend, excuse, and consent to the bigotry, hatred, prejudice and VENOM that's spewed from the Vatican.

How much longer do you think you can get away with with little game you're playing? Look around... instead of your usual fare of hit-n-run and drive-by posts, why not try something different? For once, why don't you try to actually READ some of the replies... I think you'll see that there are quite a few of us who have your all figured out.

So... anyway... if you've "had it with hateful Democrats" does this mean that you're leaving?

[Donald Ian Rankin]

45. I don't think

that any post which resorts to the "Catholics are pedophiles" meme - as many of these have - *deserves* to be read - using it is a blatant attempt to move from serious debate to something that can legitimately be termed "Catholic-bashing" and has nothing to do with logic or reason.

I do think that the homophobia is a very legitimate criticism indeed, and it's one of the reasons (along with abortion and euthanasia, to name but two) that I don't like the Catholic church and only resort to defending in on threads as one-sided and unfair as this one. But it is worth baring in mind that the Catholic church is no more homophobic than many other Christian denominations, and a good deal less so than some, and than most mainstream branches of Islam.

I don't like the Catholic church, but I'd feel far more able to raise justified criticisms of it in good conscience if there weren't so many other people going far further than is justified in doing so.

[Critters2]

64. The Catholic Church is a helluva a lot more homophobic than

my church. Our national assembly passed a resloution supporting marriage equality last summer.

And we REALLY DO have a zero tolerance policy toward pedophilia.

[Critters2]

81. Apparently you haven't been abused by your priest

try thinking about how you'd feel if you had been. And if the bishop covered it up.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

88. Oh, for...

No, I haven't been abused by my priest (I don't have a priest. I'm an atheist).

"How you would feel" is a sure sign of an attempt to substitute emotion for rational argument.

I really shouldn't need to spell this out, but since I seemingly do: my argument was not that paedophilia, whether perpetrated by priests or by others, is not a very bad thing, but rather that it is not reasonable to blame the Catholic church for all crimes committed by Catholics, only for those committed as a result of Catholicism.

And that the incidence of paedophilia by Catholic priests is far too low for it to be legitimate to tar all Catholics with the same brush, or even to tar any but the actual child-abusers and those who helped conceal it, a very low number.

It would make just as much sense to attack the nuclear family as an institution because most child abuse is commmitted by relatives.

Which is not to say that there are not plenty of legitimate reasons to dislike Catholicism as a religion, just that paedophilia isn't one of them.

[WritingIsMyReligion]

90. Arwalden....

You are so spot-on. I love this post, and I love your sig.

:D :D

WIMR

[trotsky]

61. Do you think Dennis Kucinich is a bad Catholic?

I mean, he's still a Democrat, even refused overtures to run for a third party. Yet he's as Catholic as the day is long.

This "Catholic bashing" that you whine about is little more than open criticism of an institution that has not only allowed but helped perpetuate child abuse, among countless other atrocities. Not to mention their work to undermine the Kerry (another Democratic Catholic!) candidacy with their announcement refusing communion to abortion rights supporters.

You need to stop whitewashing your adopted faith. It has a very dirty past and a not-so-tidy present.

[Bill McBlueState]

72. can you explain Kerry, then?

You say in your post that Democrats are anti-Catholic.

The Democrats nominated a Catholic to run for President.

Would you mind explaining the apparent inconsistency between a party being anti-Catholic yet nominating a Catholic as its presidential candidate? Just curious.

[f-bush]

9. You gotta be kidding me,

that's like the pot calling the kettle black. Old benedict the nazi has his head up his ass further than I thought!

[Donald Ian Rankin]

11. "Old Benedict the nazi",

while not a nice piece of work, is nothing like a nasty as one as most of the senior figures in Islam. The rather dirty aluminium saucepan calling the kettle black, possibly.

The "nazism" accusation is very much below the belt - yes, he was in the Hitlerjugend when he was younger, but before an age when he could be expected to make responsible political decisions. Consider how many respected and respectable political figures were once members of organisations they'd be ashamed to be associated with.

and irrespective of where it's coming from, I think the message is eminently sensible, although I don't expect it to have much effect.

[f-bush]

12. I beg to differ...

My family was over there during the nazi reign and old Benney may have been too young to make good choices then, but he sure as hell has been thinkin g like one ever since!

[DemBones DemBones]

17. I beg to differ. In what way do you dare to compare

anything Pope Benedict XVI has done to what the Nazi leadership did? All you are doing is showing your bigotry against Catholicism.

[catbert836]

20. Criticism of the leader

does not equate to bigotry against his flock.

[catbert836]

18. Wow.

My irony meter just shattered into a million pieces, that is, if we are talking about the same Catholic church that stops 3rd world people from using condoms, started the Inquisition, and so on and so forth.

[InaneAnanity]

19. Ironic, isn't it

The Vatican, who up until 1918 endorsed the torture and murder of "heretics", and was the cause of hundreds of millions of deaths, is denouncing the violence caused by Islam.

[arwalden]

24. And Still They Continue To Feed The Fires Of Intolerance...

... with their continual attempts to vilify and dehumanize gays and lesbians. I hold them directly responsible for the climate of hatred, intolerance and VIOLENCE towards my gay brothers and sisters. (With all this hate mongering... it's little wonder they are too busy to take care of problems in their OWN back yards.)

[Goblinmonger]

25. Jeebus hates you, this I know

for the Bible tells me so.

Leviticus 18:22 "Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination."

Tis a beautiful religion, isn't it.

[WritingIsMyReligion]

58. Just gorgeous.

:eyes:

:D

:hi:

[Zenlitened]

28. "Gays. The new Jews."

But, shhhhh... just because the Vatican uses the Nazi playbook is no reason to compare church officials to Nazis!

:crazy:

[Goblinmonger]

33. Don't know if you saw the cartoon I found

BMUS posted it in a forum, too. I know you will like it.



btw, nice to see you, have you been gone for awhile, or am I just not looking in the right places?

[WhollyHeretic]

35. That is a great one.

:rofl:

Here's a funny one I saved from a while ago(slightly off topic, but related still)

[Goblinmonger]

52. I like that one, too.

Especially how the demon is smiling.

[arwalden]

39. Oh Dear...That's Hysterical...(In An Infuriating Way) And SO TRUE!!!

(Right-click... save-as!)

Thanks for the kind words... yes, I took a little break, but all is well.

~Allen

[Goblinmonger]

51. I thought the cartoon was hilarious

and knew many in here would like it. And many would not.

[WritingIsMyReligion]

59. That I like.

:thumbsup:

[genie_weenie]

27. Hey DU how about stop generalizations and bashing of the RC Church?

Hmmm, the current Vatican (not that of Innocent III, or Gregory I) calls on Muslim leaders to allow plurality in their nations, and DUers use it to bash the Church. The Church has and IS involved in some bad dealings, but of course the hypocrisy is astounding. I always read (and rightly so) DUers admonishing people who bash Islam and ALL Muslims when something bad is done by a few muslims, yet many DUers take every opportunity to lump ALL Catholics (past & present) whenever the spirit moves them... How odd...

tocqueville, keep up the good work!

[Goblinmonger]

29. I have not seen a lot of sympathy for Muslims

in regard to the cartoon protests.

And the current Vatican may not be the Vatican of Innocent III but it is the Vatican of homophobia, horrendous policies in the Third World, and protection of pedophiles (where's Cardinal Law, again?).

[genie_weenie]

30. The muslims responsible for violence?

Sure, no sympathy for them, but for muslims being manipulated by many factions I have much sympathy...

[Goblinmonger]

32. My point was

that we call bullshit where bullshit needs to be called. The muslims leading/causing the protests are asshats. The leadership of the catholic church are asshats. That does not mean that ALL muslims nor ALL catholics are asshats.

[genie_weenie]

49. I think we're on the same page

Strange how people in Power don't ever seem to do good...

[Goblinmonger]

50. I agree.

Nice to have chatted.

[WritingIsMyReligion]

78. How about stopping the generalizations about our "generalizations?"

Not everyone on this site is rushing to "bash Catholics..."

[genie_weenie]

85. Nope! Do as I say not as I do!

:evilgrin: But, seriously you're right Most DUers are tolerant and level-headed.

[Zhade]

43. The Vatican has some gall, asking for tolerance.

Well, then again, the RCC did tolerate child-rapists in their midst, and covered it up as a matter of written (if secret) policy...

[Igel]

48. I find the way the Vatican worded the statement to be fascinating.

And the response on DU also bears commenting.

Both say far more than people give it all credit for.

One is trading "respect" for "tolerance", offering "not offending" in exchange for "not being destroyed". And yet few take issue with the asymmetry, as though it were the most natural terms for the deal.

Perhaps because given the current state of things in most places (ruling out Nigeria), they are?

[WritingIsMyReligion]

57. Hypocrisy, anyone?

The Vatican is the LAST place that should be preaching (no pun intended) about hypocrisy.

:crazy: