Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.
Hi all, please see this major site announcement: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058427594/boards-ie-2026

Catholic Church peddling porn.

2»

Comments

  • #32
    Newsite
    Closed Accounts Posts: 820 ✭✭✭Newsite


    Onesimus wrote: »
    Newsite. I answered a question that was on topic to the OP's discussion. You however have a habit of trying to engage us Catholics in a theological dispute no matter the thread or topic and want to drag it off in a different direction. Sad really.

    How is a question re turning your back on Rome relevant to the OP's discussion on the RC peddling porn (which very tellingly you are staying silent on??)

    I'm not sure why you think it's sad. What is sad is burying your head in the sand and dodging questions which might make you look in the mirror.


  • #33
    Onesimus
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,055 ✭✭✭Onesimus


    Newsite wrote: »
    How is a question re turning your back on Rome relevant to the OP's discussion on the RC peddling porn (which very tellingly you are staying silent on??)

    I'm not sure why you think it's sad. What is sad is burying your head in the sand and dodging questions which might make you look in the mirror.

    Of course it was relevant. they were discussing the OP's topic and Antiskeptic enquired would there be any ''scandal'' that would make us turn our back on Rome, so I answered that nothing will ( also implying this topic and what it was about ).


  • #34
    Onesimus
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,055 ✭✭✭Onesimus


    and I see you've edited your post durastically. Why?


  • #35
    Newsite
    Closed Accounts Posts: 820 ✭✭✭Newsite


    Onesimus wrote: »
    and I see you've edited your post durastically. Why?

    I think you mean drastically :) I see you haven't answered my question. Why?


  • #36
    Onesimus
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,055 ✭✭✭Onesimus


    Newsite wrote: »
    I think you mean drastically :) I see you haven't answered my question. Why?

    Which question Newsite? I've explained how I wasnt off topic.

    If it's the question concerning the OP I think lmao spoke for me there, and posting a response would of meant reiterating part of her post when she said she'll wait to see how the story unfolds and thats my stance. Even should it turn out to be true that the bishops really knew about it, then yes utter disgust will overshadow my week but it doesnt take away from the validity of our faith which is what my response to antiskeptic was about.

    Whats interesting about the secular media and in particular this article is that they say it had the bishops full assent, then let the bishop say they knew nothing about it, then decide to go for 2-1 and say that these people claim the bishops did know about it and were at them for over 30 years about it but all of their protests were ignored. Without concrete evidence of the story it leaves us to put our ''faith'' either into the bishops story or the people protesting them.

    Which is why it is better for me to allow the story to unfold and find out more about it.

    Satisfied?


  • Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement