Will you still go to mass on sunday?

AnonoBoy · 26-11-2009 08:16PM

segaBOY wrote: »

Agree they should be punished.

Sure there probably are still priests knocking around saying mass who have abused kids. However not ALL priests are like this, in fact the majority are not. Reminds me of a certain Roma thread and not tarring everyone with the same brush except people seem to be getting a free run to say whatever they want here...

I didn't say ALL priests have done. But there's no denying that the higher up members of the church did know what was going on and covered it up. And these people are still there. The abuse and the cover up was happening at least until five years ago. Therefore the modern day church is in no way different to the church of the past. That's my point.

Clare Bear · 26-11-2009 08:16PM

Yes I'll still go. I'm disgusted by what has happened like everyone else but I still have my beliefs. It's gotten me through some tough times and I won't let anything destroy my faith.

There are some great priests out there who are just as sickened by all of this and had nothing to do with it (they weren't all covering things up) and I feel sorry for them, it's horrible that this was allowed to happen and I can't even contemplate what happened to those poor children, it makes me sick but I still believe in God and will continue to go to mass if I want to.

dvpower · 26-11-2009 08:16PM

brummytom wrote: »

Yes I will.

In the same way I'd visit Germany, take a tour of Parliament or look around the site of the Boston Tea Party.

Things happened in the past. Terrible, despicable, inexcusable things. But that was the past. It has no place in the present.

The church of the time should be ridiculed for what happened, but not, per se, the church of today.

I understand the majority of posters here won't agree, but it's just my opinion

The report covers sexual abuse the took place from 1975 up to 2004. Would you categorise sexual abuse that took place last Tuesday as being not 'in the present'?

Latchy · 26-11-2009 08:16PM

jackpalance wrote: »

That Catholic Church is rotten to the core.

It's paid out millions (or is that billions ? ) of $ in the states to victims of abuse . Rotten to the core is right

Asmodean · 26-11-2009 08:19PM

What makes you think Christianity involves any more "fairy tales" than your own position?

I don't really understand what you mean by this statement. I know that Christianity is more of a moral compass by virtue of story-telling and the like rather than any real facts or evidence and all I am saying is that I prefer to be in the real world of here and now rather than dedicate my life to a set of rules and beliefs that have for all intents and purposes remained unchanged in thousands of years.

humanji · 26-11-2009 08:20PM

dvpower wrote: »

The report covers sexual abuse the took place from 1975 up to 2004. Would you categorise sexual abuse that took place last Tuesday as being not 'in the present'?

Well technically...

wudangclan · 26-11-2009 08:21PM

segaBOY wrote: »

Agree they should be punished.

Sure there probably are still priests knocking around saying mass who have abused kids. However not ALL priests are like this, in fact the majority are not. Reminds me of a certain Roma thread and not tarring everyone with the same brush except people seem to be getting a free run to say whatever they want here...

I believe the figure to be 4% of priests who have been accused of fiddling with kids.Presumably there's also a percentage who abused kids but were never accused.
Then there is the bishops and archbishops who covered up the abuse.
Then there are the other priests who knew about the abuse but kept quiet about it so that prcentage keeps rising (all the way to Benedict who released the Papal Bull ordering a cover-up).
Pretty rotten ,I'd say.

philologos · 26-11-2009 08:21PM

jackpalance wrote: »

What about the priests who knew what was going on but kept quiet? That's an awful lot of priests.

That Catholic Church is rotten to the core.

This is something that people say, but it isn't really something that people generally follow through with. Nobody genuinely believes when they are in mass with their family or with their grandparents that their priests, and the people in that church are really rotten to the core.

A church is more than a building, or a heirarchy, a church is the people who meet there. Perhaps that is more a Reformed idea, but it is the truth.

Do you genuinely believe the church, as in the people who genuinely believe in Catholicism are rotten to the core? This includes any parents or family members who follow it.

Instant Karma wrote: »

fixed that for you.

I find it ludicrous that people can say this. Most people in Ireland have contact with one religion and one religion alone. Assuming that all faiths and all expressions of religion are 'rotten to the core' is a logical fallacy.

Some can never account for all.

Most people in Ireland haven't even attended a Protestant church in their lives let alone entering into a synagogue or a mosque. What logical basis does this give you to call all religion rotten to the core?

Dave! · 26-11-2009 08:23PM

Jakass right on time !

No I won't be going to mass. Not because of the child molesting though.

JPA · 26-11-2009 08:24PM

Surprising amount of people saying yes and a surprising lack of abuse.

I'll just wait an hour I think.

segaBOY · 26-11-2009 08:24PM

wudangclan wrote: »

I believe the figure to be 5% of priests who have been accused of fiddling with kids.Presumably there's also a percentage who abused kids but were never accused.
Then there is the bishops and archbishops who covered up the abuse.
Then there are the other priests who knew about the abuse but kept quiet about it so that prcentage keeps rising (all the way to Benedict who released the Papal Bull ordering a cover-up).
Pretty rotten ,I'd say.

Could you give me a breakdown of the 5% figure and a source, thanks. Accused does not mean they did it. How many people are accused of crimes and found innocent? And even if that figure is anywhere near the amount of abuse that did occur it still leaves 95% of the clergy who did nothing wrong.

I agree that a number of priests and higher up members did wrong by either abusing or covering up, they should be punished to the full extent of the law.

philologos · 26-11-2009 08:25PM

Asmodean wrote: »

I don't really understand what you mean by this statement. I know that Christianity is more of a moral compass by virtue of story-telling and the like rather than any real facts or evidence and all I am saying is that I prefer to be in the real world of here and now rather than dedicate my life to a set of rules and beliefs that have for all intents and purposes remained unchanged in thousands of years.

There is evidence for much of what Christianity claims, from historical events, to archaeology to the existence of Jesus Christ.

There is a case to be made that Christianity refers to real life situations, just as applicable to our age, rather than the age that it is based in.

It is one thing to say that you just do not want to follow it. I can respect that to a degree. It is another thing to say that it is profoundly false, or refer to the beliefs of others as being 'fairy tales' surely?

You refer to Christianity as being unchanging, it is the very nature of Christianity being unchanging. If it is true, Christianity and the Gospel that we have received because of Jesus are true forever. If it changed, I'd not be convinced on the grounds that it is clearly not true.

Clare Bear · 26-11-2009 08:27PM

JPA wrote: »

Surprising amount of people saying yes and a surprising lack of abuse. I'll just wait an hour I think.

Everyone is intitled to their own opinion and to live their life the way they want to live it. Just like I wouldn't judge someone for not believing in God I don't think anyone should judge people that do.

wudangclan · 26-11-2009 08:29PM

4% according to the John Jay report in U.S.
I don't have time to google more.
Other post amended.

ShooterSF · 26-11-2009 08:29PM

jenzz wrote: »

I think everyone should be entitled to their beliefs & entitled to doubt them.

You are. You're not entitled to not have your beliefs mocked if they seem illogical though. Do you think I should have the right to believe a woman's place is in the home (for example) and not have it mocked?

Mrmoe · 26-11-2009 08:31PM

Jakkass wrote: »

There is evidence for much of what Christianity claims, from historical events, to archaeology to the existence of Jesus Christ.

Except for the evidence that there is a god, that's a pretty big piece of evidence to be missing.

segaBOY · 26-11-2009 08:31PM

wudangclan wrote: »

4% according to the John Jay report in U.S.
I don't have time to google more.
Other post amended.

Thanks wudangclan.

That leaves 96% of priests who did nothing wrong.

JPA · 26-11-2009 08:31PM

Clare Bear wrote: »

Everyone is intitled to their own opinion and to live their life the way they want to live it. Just like I wouldn't judge someone for not believing in God I don't think anyone should judge people that do.

Ah, they deserve it though.

GLaDOS · 26-11-2009 08:33PM

Clare Bear wrote: »

Everyone is intitled to their own opinion and to live their life the way they want to live it. Just like I wouldn't judge someone for not believing in God I don't think anyone should judge people that do.

I judge people who believe in religion to be misguided at best. If someone does something you think is stupid you're entitled to judge, as long as you're civil about it.

Clare Bear · 26-11-2009 08:33PM

JPA wrote: »

Ah, they deserve it though.

:P

Ha ha ah why am I even bothering, I've said my bit and now I shall go before I get annoyed

wudangclan · 26-11-2009 08:34PM

segaBOY wrote: »

Thanks wudangclan.

That leaves 96% of priests who did nothing wrong.

How many of those 96% were actively involved in covering up and how many kept quiet about colleagues in their parish.?
And how many priests were never accused.?
It's quite a bit less then 96% who did nothing wrong.

ShooterSF · 26-11-2009 08:35PM

Clare Bear wrote: »

Everyone is intitled to their own opinion and to live their life the way they want to live it. Just like I wouldn't judge someone for not believing in God I don't think anyone should judge people that do.

So again I can have the opinion that all coloured people are beneath me (again for example)? You did say "Everyone is intitled to their own opinion"....

Borneo Fnctn · 26-11-2009 08:35PM

segaBOY wrote: »

That leaves 96% of priests who did nothing wrong.

I think burying your head in the sand and ignoring the rape of children is wrong.

Bob_Harris · 26-11-2009 08:35PM

Mass is for inferior idiots.

Why would anyone want to go?

philologos · 26-11-2009 08:36PM

Mrmoe wrote: »

Except for the evidence that there is a god, that's a pretty big piece of evidence to be missing.

There is no proof for the existence of God, but there are many cases to be made for His existence within philosophy in particular. Christian apologetics in the 20th century and the 21st century has particular engaged with many of the objections that many people have with the Christian faith.

It would be gratuitous to reject something blindly without hearing what the real case is for them.

ScienceNerd wrote:

I judge people who believe in religion to be misguided at best. If someone does something you think is stupid you're entitled to judge, as long as you're civil about it.

I take the same view towards atheists. I don't feel I am entitled to judge people, I do feel that I should be free to put across my point in a reasonable manner.

I try to do that here. I don't know exactly how well I fare usually :pac:

Bob_Harris wrote: »

Mass is for inferior idiots.

Why would anyone want to go?

Sounds eerily like the Third Reich.

Why are you better than people who decide to believe in Catholicism?

Asmodean · 26-11-2009 08:37PM

I never actually referred to it as being false though. It's common fact that the bibles some follow today have been subject to numerous rewrites over the course of history. I'm not putting down anyone that believes and I won't be stooping to name-calling or immaturity in reference to the Catholic church.

You refer to Christianity as being unchanging, it is the very nature of Christianity being unchanging

Do you mean that being unwilling to progress with modern times is a fundamental element of Christianity? I think you are right and it is that very fact that has lost the religion so many of its flock. Times change and peoples attitudes change. Unless the modern church realises this it will be reduced to nothing in time. For instance, the pope condoning the use of artificial contraception in Africa. I understand this is a point of contention for the Catholic church but it's leaders are just too stubborn to open their eyes to the real world.

In the past the church did rely on heavy-handed scare mongering ( this is purely in relation to evidence I have received from members of my family so it is MY personal opinion I am referencing from ) to elicit faith and compliance.The problem is that we are now in an age of information and expanded thinking with less restrictions on freedom of speech, this will be one of the stumbling points for Christianity.

As I said before I am not personally attacking anyone. To be honest I have more respect for people who encourage their own faith to bloom in these times as it is a more personal choice that they have decided to make and they do not simply believe because they are 'forced to comply' like past generations were.

Dave! · 26-11-2009 08:38PM

Jakkass wrote: »

There is evidence for much of what Christianity claims, from historical events, to archaeology to the existence of Jesus Christ.

There is a case to be made that Christianity refers to real life situations, just as applicable to our age, rather than the age that it is based in.

It is one thing to say that you just do not want to follow it. I can respect that to a degree. It is another thing to say that it is profoundly false, or refer to the beliefs of others as being 'fairy tales' surely?

You refer to Christianity as being unchanging, it is the very nature of Christianity being unchanging. If it is true, Christianity and the Gospel that we have received because of Jesus are true forever. If it changed, I'd not be convinced on the grounds that it is clearly not true.

Except...

Slavery -> Used to be okay -> No longer okay

Oops I went there, queue spiel about slavery 'back then' being nothing like slavery of recent times... Slaves were glad to be slaves... owners were only allowed beat them sometimes... blah blah blah

c0rk3r · 26-11-2009 08:38PM

Heres a small glimpse into the human, emotional side of things

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2iQGczIx6Sg

wudangclan · 26-11-2009 08:39PM

Bob_Harris wrote: »

Mass is for inferior idiots.

Why would anyone want to go?

You should familiarise yourself with the use of e-prime,Bob.
I think people would consider you a troll less often.

ShooterSF · 26-11-2009 08:44PM

Bob_Harris wrote: »

Mass is for inferior idiots.

Why would anyone want to go?

As an atheists I find this offensive and a distraction. Indoctrination and pressure from society is what gets people into religion not intelligence(or lack of). By making that claim you are effectively claiming no one can leave the church...

Will you still go to mass on sunday?

Comments