Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Should we protest against the pope's visit?

1…1516182021…79

Comments

  • #512
    work
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 661 ✭✭✭work


    An_Toirpin wrote: »
    work wrote: »
    An_Toirpin wrote: »
    ork wrote: »
    'A year after the 1979 papal visit I was raped by a priest' - why abuse survivors are gathering during Pope Francis' visit this month

    https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/news/a-year-after-the-1979-papal-visit-i-was-raped-by-a-priest-why-abuse-survivors-are-gathering-during-pope-francis-visit-this-month-37179560.html

    This is an interesting article in the indo. Perhaps this is an event worth attending unlike the other dubious meeting in the park. If you read what happened to him and other survivors along with the churches assistance to this paedophile (and many otehrs) how can anyone with any sense still attend the park???
    Considering that no one responsible is in power now in Ireland or Rome and considering that those in power have done a huge amount to right the wrongs (even though you can't really undue any as grave as child abuse) no one should have doubts about going to the Papal mass. The correct analogy would be holding Theresa May accountable for abuses of power of Prime Minsiter James Callaghan. It does not compute.

    Are you insane, All the guys in power are in their 70s and 80s and got there by being sycophantic ass kissers that toe the line no matter what. Society is splitting 3 ways. 1) The deluded that believe the evil and poisoned CC should be followed no matter what. Excuses can easily be derived at no matter how stupid....oh  and they righted their wrongs, LAUGHABLE . 2) Probably the biggest group could not give a sh*t and 3) Those that are looking for real change.
    The first and third group will never agree. Anyway enjoy kissing the papal "ring" in the park.
    You are totally mispresenting the situation to make your position more justified. There are many different views points out there and everyone is entitled to their view. But freedom of speech is not freedom from criticism and the muppets who rabbit on about separation of church and state, who then lecture Catholics on why they should change need to be called out as inconsistent.
    YES you are entitled to you view no matter how mad. You are not answering simple questions but just tow the same line. For example the inconsistent line is rubbish as are your lack of answers when called out on it.


  • #513
    Leroy42
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,071 ✭✭✭✭Leroy42


    DickSwiveller Returns wrote: »
    Leroy42 wrote: »
    Bu therein lies the rub.

    You are perfectly correct in that religious matters should be private and left down to each individual. Sure there are some people that think all religion is evil and should be wiped out, but from my knowledge that is a very small minority.

    Most people are content to let people believe whatever they want to believe.

    The problem is that religion itself doesn't see it that way. All churches, not just the CC but that is the main culprit in Ireland, but Islam in some countries, Judaism in others, evangelicals in the South of the US etc, want religion not to be simply a personal belief, left alone. They want it to be front and center.

    They want laws to be made based on their interpretation of morality. They want schools to teach their particular version of the 'truth'. It is only now, now that they are coming under increasing pressure from society, that they all of a sudden want everyone to be left alone and their views accepted.

    Was peoples views on divorce accepted for years? What about people individual position on abortion? Only recently has society taken back the decision of those sorts of things from the church.

    So by all means have a religion, religion can be a great and wonderful force. It can lead to great good and peace and serenity. But all that can also be achieved without it.

    Do you not see how you are contradicting yourself here? Someone who is in favour of abortion, and how actively campaigns to have it legalized is imposing their morality on the rest of society. You seem to think that one form of morality is bad and another good without explaining yourself.

    Its the exact opposite. I have a position but it is not my place to demand others agree with my basis of morality, especially when that morality is based on nothing but my churches interpretation of a book that they complied.


  • #514
    DickSwiveller Returns
    Closed Accounts Posts: 752 ✭✭✭DickSwiveller Returns


    Leroy42 wrote: »
    Its the exact opposite. I have a position but it is not my place to demand others agree with my basis of morality, especially when that morality is based on nothing but my churches interpretation of a book that they complied.

    How can an intelligent person make a statement like this? What about murder? Are you not demanding would-be murderers follow your moral outlook by throwing them in prison should they commit one.


  • #515
    Leroy42
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,071 ✭✭✭✭Leroy42


    DickSwiveller Returns wrote: »
    How can an intelligent person make a statement like this? What about murder? Are you not demanding would-be murderers follow your moral outlook by throwing them in prison should they commit one.

    The statement I made, which you only partially quoted was
    I have a position but it is not my place to demand others agree with my basis of morality, especially when that morality is based on nothing but my churches interpretation of a book that they complied

    Not sure where you got the idea that I was somehow saying that murder was ok. The point was that morality should not be based on what you have interpreted from a particular section of a particular book that you happen to like.

    This isn't the thread, but morality, IMO, should be based on not causing harm to others. That should be the basic plank around which all other decisions are made.

    I do fin it odd that you jumped to murder. When the bible treats being gay as sin to be killed for, adultery the same. Even praying to other gods should result in the same punishment. Is that really a good basis for morality?

    Going back OT, I see today a number of reports about the vaitican trying to strong arm the state into indemnifying them from any claims.

    But haven't we been told that the Vatican and thus the pope has really nothing to do with the CC in Ireland, that it can't be held responsible for a few bad apples?

    Seems like the vatican is more than happy to get involved to protect itself. Funny, that there didn't seem to be much concern for the victims.

    But hey, that was all the way back in 2003, the vatican is totally changed now
    Vatican proposed Irish State indemnify it against clerical abuse claims
    https://www.irishtimes.com/news/social-affairs/religion-and-beliefs/vatican-proposed-irish-state-indemnify-it-against-clerical-abuse-claims-1.3589213


  • #516
    An_Toirpin
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 424 ✭✭An_Toirpin


    Water John wrote: »
    See the film Spotlight a few nights ago on RTE. Very disturbing. If I was responsible in any way for the merry go round of moving paedophile priests, and the resultant broken lives of so many, I would have serious problems living with myself.
    Whether people go to see the Pope or not is up to themselves, but the abuse issue in Ireland should be publicly addressed.
    I agree and I think he will. Spotlight is a good film but it implied at the time of making nothing had changed. That could not be further from the truth. Everyone involved in abuse and cover up in Ireland and Boston is gone. Nor can Rome be blamed for cover up. The administration in Rome is very small and has a minimal role.


  • Advertisement
  • #517
    Hitman3000
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,596 ✭✭✭Hitman3000


    Dermot Ahern former minister for foriegn affairs is quoted in a piece in the Times stating the Vatican sought an indemnity from abuse allegations in 2004. So this suggestion that the church in Rome bore no responsibility for what happened in Ireland is nonsense.


  • #518
    Hector Bellend
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,667 ✭✭✭Hector Bellend


    No.

    I really dont care that much.

    My primary concern is that my local pub is right next to the wall of the phoenix park and I wont be able to go for pints.


  • #519
    An_Toirpin
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 424 ✭✭An_Toirpin


    Leroy42 wrote: »
    I do fin it odd that you jumped to murder. When the bible treats being gay as sin to be killed for, adultery the same. Even praying to other gods should result in the same punishment. Is that really a good basis for morality?

    Going back OT, I see today a number of reports about the Vatican trying to strong arm the state into indemnifying them from any claims.

    But haven't we been told that the Vatican and thus the pope has really nothing to do with the CC in Ireland, that it can't be held responsible for a few bad apples?

    Seems like the Vatican is more than happy to get involved to protect itself. Funny, that there didn't seem to be much concern for the victims.

    But hey, that was all the way back in 2003, the vatican is totally changed now

    https://www.irishtimes.com/news/social-affairs/religion-and-beliefs/vatican-proposed-irish-state-indemnify-it-against-clerical-abuse-claims-1.3589213
    If the Bible says gays should be killed why is state killing of gays so rare in Christian countries historically? The reality is the Bible says nothing. It is a bunch of sources with varying levels of historicity and no Christian lives by the Old Testament Law verbatim.



    McAleese's report has very little information. It is incredibly presumptuous to assume anything about it. Secrecy is not normally a good idea but it was thought to protect the victim. It is true in 2003 that Rome was blase about the slowly emerging abuse scandal and that didn't act appropriately. This is well documented but it is an outright lie to say that they didn't care about victims.
    BTW where did you get this claim it tried to strong arm?


  • #520
    Water John
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,839 ✭✭✭✭Water John


    The church is an institution, including both the lay people and the clergy. Remember the last Archbishop of Armagh, refused to resign, even tough his role was well documented.
    There are 9,500 people here, present members who are more concerned about not having this priest present at the event than about requesting the Pope to address this awful chapter in the churche's history.

    http://www.thejournal.ie/dublin-lgbt-priest-4167961-Aug2018/

    This I find shocking. I am not anti religious but Spotlight is not a previous narrative. People have to live and some die, with the scars of this, in the present time.


  • #521
    An_Toirpin
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 424 ✭✭An_Toirpin


    Water John wrote: »
    The church is an institution, including both the lay people and the clergy. Remember the last Archbishop of Armagh, refused to resign, even tough his role was well documented.
    There are 9,500 people here, present members who are more concerned about not having this priest present at the event than about requesting the Pope to address this awful chapter in the churche's history.

    http://www.thejournal.ie/dublin-lgbt-priest-4167961-Aug2018/

    This I find shocking. I am not anti religious but Spotlight is not a previous narrative. People have to live and some die, with the scars of this, in the present time.
    Spotlight is a film but a church that has radically changed. Deal with it.



    Attitudes Pro LGBT clerics have nothing to do with child abuse. Nothing. It is a ridiculous comparison. A lot of people are strongly opposed to this pro LGBT life style cleric. They are entitled to their opinion.


  • Advertisement
  • #522
    P_1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,681 ✭✭✭✭P_1


    An_Toirpin wrote: »
    Spotlight is a film but a church that has radically changed. Deal with it.



    Attitudes Pro LGBT clerics have nothing to do with child abuse. Nothing. It is a ridiculous comparison. A lot of people are strongly opposed to this pro LGBT life style cleric. They are entitled to their opinion.

    Indeed they are. However a lot more people are entitled to call this opinion out as the asinine crap that it is and which has no place in our republic


  • #523
    Hector Bellend
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,667 ✭✭✭Hector Bellend


    I was watching the film "the boston globe" last week.

    The phrase about good men doing nothing was particularly relevant.

    When it comes to the church's abuse of children there is no defending the indefensible. However, looking back there was either a lot of willing ignorance or downright collusion.

    Parents never asked questions of a priest. EVER. It just wasn't done.

    Where were the gardai.


  • #524
    An_Toirpin
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 424 ✭✭An_Toirpin


    P_1 wrote: »
    Indeed they are. However a lot more people are entitled to call this opinion out as the asinine crap that it is and which has no place in our republic


    So let me get this straight, if you think gay sex is morally wrong, you are more inclined to think priests raping boys is ok or not worth being concerned about.


    You do realize many of the most vocal people in the abuse scandal were devout Catholics.


  • #525
    Water John
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,839 ✭✭✭✭Water John


    I suggest you meet a few of those who were abused. They would like to know, the world has changed to the better, for them. The ruination of a person's life by this is shocking and the church is morally obliged to repay the damage.

    I find your views Toirpin to be disgusting.
    Those seeking to have Fr Martin not present because they disagree with him and his view that the church should embrace the LGBT community are not true Christians.


  • #526
    An_Toirpin
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 424 ✭✭An_Toirpin


    Hector Bellend wrote: »
    I was watching the film "the boston globe" last week.

    The phrase about good men doing nothing was particularly relevant.

    When it comes to the church's abuse of children there is no defending the indefensible. However, looking back there was either a lot of willing ignorance or downright collusion.

    Parents never asked questions of a priest. EVER. It just wasn't done.

    Where were the gardai.
    True and this is why when abuse happens nowadays it is mostly in a family setting where there is no one to ask questions.


  • #527
    Seth Brundle
    Moderators, Politics Moderators Posts: 43,010 Mod ✭✭✭✭Seth Brundle


    An_Toirpin wrote: »
    Everyone involved in abuse and cover up in Ireland and Boston is gone.
    What evidence have you for this?
    An_Toirpin wrote: »
    Nor can Rome be blamed for cover up. The administration in Rome is very small and has a minimal role.
    Why seek a state indemnity from blame then?
    An_Toirpin wrote: »
    It is true in 2003 that Rome was blase about the slowly emerging abuse scandal and that didn't act appropriately. This is well documented but it is an outright lie to say that they didn't care about victims.
    BTW where did you get this claim it tried to strong arm?
    Do you mean didn't care in terms of scaring the victims to sign non disclosure agreements or didn't care by hiring lawyers to vigorously contest claims of abuse or what? Maybe you think their caring attitude comes from canon law?
    It would be nice if you gave an example of how the church showed its caring side towards the victims just to remind us.
    I see nothing Christian in how the church behaved towards victims until it was forced to follow a set of rules imposed following various tribunals and inquiries.
    Water John wrote: »
    The church is an institution, including both the lay people and the clergy.
    Correction: the RCC is a business run by mysognistic sexually obsessed men. It has always been about the money and nothing will change until the RCC funds dry up.


  • #528
    Leroy42
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,071 ✭✭✭✭Leroy42


    Hector Bellend wrote: »
    I was watching the film "the boston globe" last week.

    The phrase about good men doing nothing was particularly relevant.

    When it comes to the church's abuse of children there is no defending the indefensible. However, looking back there was either a lot of willing ignorance or downright collusion.

    Parents never asked questions of a priest. EVER. It just wasn't done.

    Where were the gardai.

    Have you questioned why that was the case?

    Was it that the parents, teachers & gardai were inherently evil and agreed with the raping of children, or do you think that maybe the church abused its powerful position by ensuring that people would always take the word of a priest?

    That a cardinal can fly into Ireland and his first point is to demand that Ireland indemnify the Vatican from any costs? That was in 2003 when the church had already lost significant power, imagine what it must have been like in the 60's and 70's and 80's when the church was all powerful.


  • #529
    An_Toirpin
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 424 ✭✭An_Toirpin


    Seth Brundle wrote: »
    What evidence have you for this?

    Why seek a state indemnity from blame then?


    Do you mean didn't care in terms of scaring the victims to sign non disclosure agreements or didn't care by hiring lawyers to vigorously contest claims of abuse or what? Maybe you think their caring attitude comes from canon law?
    It would be nice if you gave an example of how the church showed its caring side towards the victims just to remind us.
    I see nothing Christian in how the church behaved towards victims until it was forced to follow a set of rules imposed following various tribunals and inquiries.


    Correction: the RCC is a business run by mysognistic sexually obsessed men. It has always been about the money and nothing will change until the RCC funds dry up.
    Every priest with accusations who has been forced to have no contact with children is an examples of RCC caring for victums.



    If the RCC is only about money how is that priests get paid so little and why do so many like our Jesuit Pope take no salary with their vow of poverty. What a joke of an interpretation.


  • #530
    Hitman3000
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,596 ✭✭✭Hitman3000


    An_Toirpin wrote:
    If the RCC is only about money how is that priests get paid so little and why do so many like our Jesuit Pope take no salary with their vow of poverty. What a joke of an interpretation.

    Easy take a vow of proverty when all your worldly needs are met. Free house, free travel, free food, free clothes,free medical care. What need for money?


  • #531
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,934 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    An_Toirpin wrote: »
    Every priest with accusations who has been forced to have no contact with children is an examples of RCC caring for victums.



    If the RCC is only about money how is that priests get paid so little and why do so many like our Jesuit Pope take no salary with their vow of poverty. What a joke of an interpretation.


    Did this happen to every priest with an accusation against them? Or did the church just move priests on to a different parish so they could abuse again?


  • Advertisement
  • #532
    An_Toirpin
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 424 ✭✭An_Toirpin


    Hitman3000 wrote: »
    Easy take a vow of proverty when all your worldly needs are met. Free house, free travel, free food, free clothes,free medical care. What need for money?
    If it is so easy why don't more do it.


  • #533
    Hitman3000
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,596 ✭✭✭Hitman3000


    An_Toirpin wrote:
    Every priest with accusations who has been forced to have no contact with children is an examples of RCC caring for victums.


    Really?have you a link that you could provide. Brendan Smyths victims may disagree with your claim however. Or is this just a recent thing?


  • #534
    An_Toirpin
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 424 ✭✭An_Toirpin


    ohnonotgmail wrote: »
    Did this happen to every priest with an accusation against them? Or did the church just move priests on to a different parish so they could abuse again?
    So if they didnt always do the right thing they clearly had no care what so ever to victims. What an absurd argument. Yes there was awful cover up but many did care about the welfare of victims.


  • #535
    Hitman3000
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,596 ✭✭✭Hitman3000


    An_Toirpin wrote:
    If it is so easy why don't more do it.


    As i said easy take a vow of proverty when all your needs are met. The rest of us have to provide for ourselves. Hes living off the sweat of the 'faithful'.


  • #536
    Leroy42
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,071 ✭✭✭✭Leroy42


    An_Toirpin wrote: »
    Every priest with accusations who has been forced to have no contact with children is an examples of RCC caring for victums.

    Well, it sounds more like they want to protect themselves.

    It is not a bad thing of course, but miles away from being sufficient. Open the files, provide independent support to the victims, work with the authorities to insure this can never happen again. Carry out investigations to try to ascertain why priests did the things they did, why the lay people failed to act, what lessons can be learned.
    An_Toirpin wrote: »
    If the RCC is only about money how is that priests get paid so little and why do so many like our Jesuit Pope take no salary with their vow of poverty. What a joke of an interpretation.

    The CC is all about money, the fact that get people to do things for nothing is proof of that. Women can't be priests, but they are more than happy to let them work for free.

    The CC is all about money and power.

    The child abuse scandal shows that it has nothing to do with morality.


  • #537
    Hitman3000
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,596 ✭✭✭Hitman3000


    Leroy42 wrote:
    The CC is all about money and power.


    Don't forget control.


  • #538
    Leroy42
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,071 ✭✭✭✭Leroy42


    An_Toirpin wrote: »
    So if they didnt always do the right thing they clearly had no care what so ever to victims. What an absurd argument. Yes there was awful cover up but many did care about the welfare of victims.

    And this is the bit I don't understand.

    How can you simply accept that the CC, that portrays itself as the true word of god, even gotten do a point of not doing the right thing?

    At what point does an organisation that believes in the bible and the word of Jesus decide that it is more important to protect itself rather than children in its care?

    For an individual to do that we would call evil, but an entire organisation? And of course not everyone in the CC was involved, but they continue to support it, continue to make excuses for it.

    If the CC could have let itself fall so far from its own ideals, then what is the basis for it continuing?


  • #539
    Sofiztikated
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,995 ✭✭✭Sofiztikated


    An_Toirpin wrote: »
    Every priest with accusations who has been forced to have no contact with children is an examples of RCC caring for victums.



    If the RCC is only about money how is that priests get paid so little and why do so many like our Jesuit Pope take no salary with their vow of poverty. What a joke of an interpretation.

    https://www.irishmirror.ie/news/irish-news/catholic-church-asking-wealthy-followers-12010621

    (I know it's The Mirror, but still.)

    https://money.cnn.com/2015/09/24/news/pope-francis-visit-vatican-catholic-church/index.html

    The CC is very much interested in money. The priests are the same as your average counter staff in McDonalds, selling a product, and the Pope is PR friendly CEO, installed there by the board. The congregation is the punter, and they pay handsomely for the service of saving their souls.


  • #540
    seamus
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 68,190 ✭✭✭✭seamus


    An_Toirpin wrote: »
    like our Jesuit Pope take no salary with their vow of poverty.
    :D:D

    The poor guy. All he gets is a palace to live in, assistants to attend to his every need, food, clothing, heat, light, telecommunications, domestic and international travel, five-star, celebrity treatment, diplomatic immunity and absolute dictatorial power over a small country until the day he dies.


    And he doesn't see a bean in payment for it.


  • Advertisement
  • #541
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,934 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    An_Toirpin wrote: »
    So if they didnt always do the right thing they clearly had no care what so ever to victims. What an absurd argument. Yes there was awful cover up but many did care about the welfare of victims.


    SOME may have cared. Most did not. Most were concerned with the image of the church above all else.


Advertisement