nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Are you thinking of leaving the Catholic Church?

MrMatisse

Just wondering is anyone thinking of doing this given the recent revalations?

If you do want to:

http://www.countmeout.ie/

Theres also a pre written email if you wanna just say your not happy at what went on.

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

MrMatisse

Max Power1 wrote: »

yes you are mis informed. A big grey bearded man in the sky told me that i am right and you are wrong.

obviously i agree with you

Well a man with wings strumming a harp appeared in front of me on Harcourt street at 3am last friday when i was pissed and told me I am right!

MrMatisse

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/8382010.stm

Meemars

TheZohan wrote: »

What a ridiculous site.

A silly website telling you why you should leave the church, as if people have no mind of their own.

Not telling you why, INFORMING you HOW, if you're already thinking that way. The are simply giving factual information on the process itself, they're not preaching.
I know I am seriously considering it, but not only because of the culture of shame, abuse and corruption, I just don't believe.
I think Religion is just superstition, and the practise of the same is all a lot of mumbo jumbo. Does nothing for me, and when I read of systematic corruption and the history of violence, bloodshed, and misuse of power in the Catholic Church over the centuries, I really want to get very, very far away from it.

Osgoodisgood

Jakkass wrote: »

Another thread!

Um, yes. It's a fairly big story you know? I think you can look forward to blanket coverage for the next little while.

I guess I shouldn't vote on this poll as I have nothing to leave.

You don't need to dissassociate yourself. Nobody thinks you did it.

I wonder how many church-goers are wishing the whole sorry mess hadn't happened? I would guess about 100%. I wonder how many wish that if it had to happen that it had never been made public? I'm guessing more than 0%

prinz

Really-Stressed wrote: »

Ill informed?

Max Power1 wrote: »

yes you are mis informed. A big grey bearded man in the sky told me that i am right and you are wrong.

Really-Stressed wrote: »

Well a man with wings strumming a harp appeared in front of me on Harcourt street at 3am last friday when i was pissed and told me I am right!

Sorry since when did this thread become a thread on God or the Bible? It started off based upon the report, and the main cheerleaders here against the Church have admitted not reading it, so yeah ill informed. But then again go on, you tell me who was responsible for what....:rolleyes: ... just showing yerselves up tbh.

MrMatisse

My first instinct on hearing of this was not to crack open the report and read more, it was disgust.

Handsome Bob

Osgoodisgood wrote: »

Um, yes. It's a fairly big story you know? I think you can look forward to blanket coverage for the next little while.

You don't need to dissassociate yourself. Nobody thinks you did it.

I wonder how many church-goers are wishing the whole sorry mess hadn't happened? I would guess about 100%. I wonder how many wish that if it had to happen that it had never been made public? I'm guessing more than 0%

That is pretty unfair, how insulting is that to the human nature of a large number of people? Do you really think that people as a whole would put pedophile priests on a pedestal above their own children?

TheZohanS

Meemars wrote: »

Not telling you why, INFORMING you HOW, if you're already thinking that way. The are simply giving factual information on the process itself, they're not preaching.

And I quote, from the site:

Why?

Read some of the reasons why you should consider leaving the church

So it is in fact telling you why you should leave the church.

philologos

Really-Stressed: We know who wrote most if not all of the Biblical books, and we know how they were compiled.

There was no editing involved, all that was involved was selecting books, we know this because the New Testaments we have are the most authentic ancient texts that we have with around 99.5% accuracy. The 0.5% which are in doubt in most cases involve spelling in the Greek, or involve references to passages that exist in the other 95.5%.

MrMatisse

Jakkass wrote: »

Really-Stressed: We know who wrote most if not all of the Biblical books, and we know how they were compiled.

There was no editing involved, all that was involved was selecting books, we know this because the New Testaments we have are the most authentic ancient texts that we have with around 99.5% accuracy. The 0.5% which are in doubt in most cases involve spelling in the Greek, or involve references to passages that exist in the other 95.5%.

Dead sea scrolls anyone????

It is impossible to know who wrote it.

Selecting books is editing

bad2dabone

regardless of one's own personal beliefs, the guys at the top of the Church who covered up the abuses and the perpetrators of these sickening crimes didn't believe in what the church preaches.

For me the fact that the abuse was systemic and those at the top knew about it prove that the church as an organisation was full of evil hypocrites.

I've met really good priests and know that there are some who feel a calling to a spiritual life, and I feel sorry for those who must be as disgusted as the rest of us towards the abusers and those who covered it up as they're being tarred with the same brush as the abusers. But one must ask did the ordinary priests know about it? I suspect in some diocese there must have been rumors that father So and So was a nonce.

I can't in good conscience support an organisation who allowed this to go on up to as recently as 2004. I believe Archbishop Martin is a good man, but the abusers and facilitators are still about, http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/eymhojsngbcw/rss2/ still being supported by the church.

I think you can believe in god in your own way, but I don't believe in the catholic church. And never will.

philologos

Osgoodisgood wrote: »

You don't need to dissassociate yourself. Nobody thinks you did it.

I've never been baptised in Roman Catholicism, neither of my parents weren't baptised Roman Catholic, and their parents weren't baptised Roman Catholic, and I never went to a Catholic school. I don't think I'm qualified to vote on the poll.

I have a degree of admiration for Catholicism as a religious belief.

Osgoodisgood wrote: »

I wonder how many church-goers are wishing the whole sorry mess hadn't happened? I would guess about 100%. I wonder how many wish that if it had to happen that it had never been made public? I'm guessing more than 0%

I think all of us wish that this sordid affair never happened.

prinz

Really-Stressed wrote: »

My first instinct on hearing of this was not to crack open the report and read more, it was disgust.

Yet you still believe you have the right to tell people who have read the report who was responsible and who wasn't?

Are you psychic? Or have you just read a few headlines in the Sun?

Turtwig

LZ5by5 wrote: »

I'm not a religious man, but all the same I don't see why people should give up on their religion just because of the disgraceful behaviour of the Catholic Church hierarchy.

+1.

prinz

Really-Stressed wrote: »

Dead sea scrolls anyone????

Are they in the Bible?

philologos

Really-Stressed wrote: »

Dead sea scrolls anyone????

It is impossible to know who wrote it.

Selecting books is editing

You're proving your ignorance on theological matters.

In Cave 1 in Qumran where the Dead Sea Scrolls were found. A copy of the Book of Isaiah dating to 100AD was found. In comparison with another manuscript that was previously held from the 6th century BC there was a complete match.

Most such finds confirm the Biblical text, rather than deny it.

Of course also at Qumran were the writings of the Essene monks, which were external to the Bible.

However the Dead Sea Scrolls strengthen our case rather than weaken it. Infact the Dead Sea Scrolls where they are manuscripts of the Bible, are used in all modern Bible translations.

Seriously, do your homework!

MrMatisse

prinz wrote: »

Are they in the Bible?

No they just disprove it.

The critical analysis of authorship now encompasses every book of the Bible. In some cases the traditional view on authorship has been overturned; in others, additional support, at least in part, has been found.
The development of the hypothesis has not stopped with Wellhausen. Wellhausen's hypothesis, for example, proposed that the four documents were composed in the order J-E-D-P, with P, containing the bulk of the Jewish law, dating from the post-Exilic Second Temple period (i.e., after 515 BC);[26] but the contemporary view is that P is earlier than D, and that all four books date from the First Temple period (i.e., prior to 587 BC).[27] The documentary hypothesis has more recently been refined by later scholars such as Martin Noth (who in 1943 provided evidence that Deuteronomy plus the following six books make a unified history from the hand of a single editor), Harold Bloom, Frank Moore Cross and Richard Elliot Friedman.
The documentary hypothesis, at least in the four-document version advanced by Wellhausen, has been controversial since its formulation. The direction of this criticism is to question the existence of separate, identifiable documents, positing instead that the biblical text is made up of almost innumerable strands so interwoven as to be hardly untangleable—the J document, in particular, has been subjected to such intense dissection that it seems in danger of disappearing.
Although biblical archaeology has confirmed the existence of many people, places, and events mentioned in the Bible, many critical scholars have argued that the Bible be read not as an accurate historical document, but rather as a work of literature and theology that often draws on historical events—as well as upon non-Hebrew mythology—as primary source material (see The Bible and history). For these scholars, the Bible reveals much about the lives and times of its authors and compilers

[Deleted User]

Jakkass wrote: »

No, a personal God. I would consider Deism to be an unreasonable position making little or no sense. Why on earth would God create the world and then just go away? It makes more sense that God as Creator would take an active interest in our world, and in our welfare.

Again, just because one likes the idea of Deism more doesn't mean that it is reasonable.

See above.

Darwin himself said that his theory could be reconciled with Judeo-Christianity in his own works.

Again, it's not about needs. It's about truth. What is true, doesn't always correspond with what people think is needed. Then again, people can be wrong in assessing what needs they have at times. We do not need faith for scientific reasons, but I'd hold that we do need it in several other respects.

This science vs religion nonsense clearly isn't the case when you have Jews, Christians, Muslims, Sikhs, and so on involved in science. Therefore I reject your reasoning. Clearly science poses no major issue to peoples faith.

Darwins work makes very interesting reading and explains alot.

Have you ever read On the Origin of Species?

fryup

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U0kJHQpvgB8

flanzer

Sure give it 20 years, the Catholic church will be gone by then. If we are to keep up our education standards, new newest of the generations will see that it's a load of makey-up codswallop.

Turtwig

Jakkass wrote: »

You're proving your ignorance on theological matters.

In Cave 1 in Qumran where the Dead Sea Scrolls were found. A copy of the Book of Isaiah dating to 100AD was found. In comparison with another manuscript that was previously held from the 6th century BC there was a complete match.

Most such finds confirm the Biblical text, rather than deny it.

Of course also at Qumran were the writings of the Essene monks, which were external to the Bible.

However the Dead Sea Scrolls strengthen our case rather than weaken it. Infact the Dead Sea Scrolls where they are manuscripts of the Bible, are used in all modern Bible translations.

Seriously, do your homework!

Aha!!!

I got you now mister Jakkass, your ignorance of theological matters is now irrefutable!!

Qumran Wadi

Sorry, bad morning.

philologos

rarnes1 wrote: »

Darwins work makes very interesting reading and explains alot.

Have you ever read On the Origin of Species?

No I haven't read it itself. I intend to at some point.

I never said that Darwin's work didn't say a lot. I merely said that Xluna is strawmanning what Darwin actually said. At most Darwin was an agnostic.

MrMatisse

prinz wrote: »

Yet you still believe you have the right to tell people who have read the report who was responsible and who wasn't? Are you psychic? Or have you just read a few headlines in the Sun?

You dont buy the sun for the headlines.

Meemars

TheZohan wrote: »

And I quote, from the site:

So it is in fact telling you why you should leave the church.

You're right, The Zohan, I didn't re-check the site before posting, apologies.
I still interpret the site as being an information site, rather than a preachy one. They're not trying to get people to defect, only to inform them how. The fact that they have "reasons why" is to allow for an informed decision, imo.

Handsome Bob

Really-Stressed wrote: »

You dont buy the sun for the headlines.

LOL have to admit Really Stressed, you're good craic.

[Deleted User]

Jakkass wrote: »

No I haven't read it itself. I intend to at some point.

I never said that Darwin's work didn't say a lot. I merely said that Xluna is strawmanning what Darwin actually said. At most Darwin was an agnostic.

Darwin was an agnostic.

Osgoodisgood

LZ5by5 wrote: »

That is pretty unfair, how insulting is that to the human nature of a large number of people? Do you really think that people as a whole would put pedophile priests on a pedestal above their own children?

I haven't a clue what you're on about. Did you actually read my post?
I was merely saying that in my opinion there are at least some people who would prefer that the systemic clerical abuse of children had never been reported.

MrMatisse

Really-Stressed: To do list

Read the dead sea scrolls
Read the report
Buy todays sun
Return informed to after hours.

Before doing this opinions arnt worth sh*t.

Handsome Bob

Osgoodisgood wrote: »

I haven't a clue what you're on about. Did you actually read my post?
I was merely saying that in my opinion there are at least some people who would prefer that the systemic clerical abuse of children had never been reported.

I did indeed read your post;

Osgoodisgood wrote: »

I wonder how many wish that if it had to happen that it had never been made public? I'm guessing more than 0%

You suggested that some people wished that the crimes never went reported, which in turn suggests that you think people would put the protection of their priests a head of the well being of children in this country.

prinz

Really-Stressed wrote: »

Before doing this opinions arnt worth sh*t.

Everyone is welcome to an opinion, but not to try to tell people what's in the report when you haven't read it.