| This thread has been locked, it will not receive new replies. |
|
Locked on 04/28/2010 11:54:24 PM PDT by Admin Moderator, reason:
Per poster’s request |
Posted on 04/18/2010 9:49:35 PM PDT by Judith Anne
I seriously wonder about some FReepers, sometimes. Any other person accused of a crime would be defended by every FReeper as being innocent until proven guilty by a court of law. I've seen whole threads written by men who have been accused of child abuse by ex-wives out to deny them their visitation rights or to wrest more money out of them. These men are rightly indignant, and furious about the unjust accusations that cannot be proven but are never withdrawn.
Yet where are those FReepers when a PRIEST is accused? Where is the presumption of innocence? Suddenly, every accusation becomes a verdict, and not only the accused but his entire organization and all its adherents are held responsible.
I can only wonder what some of these so-called conservatives (who so faithfully defend the Constitution) would do, if THEY were the ones accused! It is a nightmare for any man -- all of you know how even the accusation stains the man forever, even if it is proven false!
Not only that, many here assert that the problems of 30, 40 and even 50 years ago must be tried in the media TODAY!
Remember the Duke rape case? There are more similarities than differences here. The priests are accused, nifonged, and instead of being defended, they are vilified!
What other man of you could stand under the weight of such an accusation trumpeted by the press, and come out whole? None! And such accusations made, LONG after the statute of limitations has passed, sometimes even after the accused is dead and buried for YEARS -- are YOU one of those who automatically, reflexively, spitefully, and gleefully act as judge, jury, and executioner?
Women! What if it were YOUR HUSBAND, YOUR BROTHER, YOUR FATHER, YOUR UNCLE, YOUR SON who was accused? Wouldn't you want the best defense possible? Wouldn't YOU believe in their innocence? Wouldn't YOU help protect your loved ones as much as possible? And yet, YOU JUDGE THE CHURCH FOR DOING WHAT YOU WOULD DO?
Shame! Vast shame! On all who have sinned against the innocent!
Let's not forget he was working without the benefit of the Popes during the canonical times. Now that we have Popes God has someone to confer with to make sure he gets it right.
On a related note, I watched the pilot episode of "Happy Town" tonight. It could have easily been named, "Romish Town".
Mark, did you miss post #2662? Blue Duncan did an exemplary job addressing the point.
The whole “RC” thing is something I had NEVER heard of in all my years as a Catholic and in all my years of association with Catholics. The first time I had ever heard of it was just recently (within the last year) on this forum.
So, 1800s and early 1900s notwithstanding, since that was just shy or a hundred years ago, you’ve got some generations of people in between them that never heard of the abbreviation used in that derogatory way.
Since words can change in meaning and previously innocuous words can take on derogatory meanings, likewise, terms and words can lose derogatory meanings, as the abbreviation of “RC” has apparently done.
The letters “RC” are just a very logical abbreviation of *Roman Catholic*. Are we becoming so PC in our thinking that we have to demand that a reasonable, logical abbreviation not be used because it reminds someone of some insult of some kind from years gone by?
The ones making the most of the issue have already demonstrated a great deal of thin skinned-ness, and that is likely why nobody is taking their complaints all that seriously.
Moooommmmm, make him stop! I don’t like what he said and what I think he meant.
Sheesh. Don’t take such offense when none is intended.
So much for the argument that Paul did not reiterate the Gospel in his letters.
Colossians 2:9, “In him the whole fullness of deity dwells bodily.”
Philippians 2:5-11, “Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus: Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men: And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross. Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name: That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth; And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.
Excuse me, but that is ridiculous.
Roman Catholics have told us on this website that they take offense at being called "Roman" Catholics. Now they tell us "RC" is a pejorative when even fellow Roman Catholics use the term in reference to themselves.
If someone on the forum wrote "arse" as shorthand for "Roman Catholic," you might have a complaint. But that is the first time I've ever heard of this meaning attached to "RC." Regardless, no one here is calling anyone an "arse."
Frankly, this constant attempt to control the language is pretty transparent.
For the record, no one complained when Mark used the shorthand of "OPC." It was the use of another acronym for that organization that was offensive because it was clearly scatological. In this country.
NOT
—necessarily
—automatically
—100% of the time.
SOMETIMES that’s as close as some folks come to having even a very fractionally effective mirror put before them.
Amen.
Mine were deep rooted, broken off, full of cavities, fragile etc.
Thx for the explanation.
Thanks for the tip. We’ll be sure to watch.
Because its history isn't its present.
You need to get over being perpetually offended and then demanding that everyone accommodate your sensibilities.
For the record, the Orthodox Presbyterian Church uses OPC as throughout its website and its church website is www.opc.com. You have no objection here.
Which Catholics use the term RC to refer to themselves? I am aware of none.
If you wish to become acquainted with the antiCatholic terminology of the 1800s and early 1900s, I would be happy to be your guide.
That was my thought as well. Happens to me all the time and I don't always proofread as well as I should. Usually I catch them but not always.
A lot of strange, heretofore unknown things pop up on this forum.
Well put.
HOWEVER, even when “Catholic” is used . . .
a significant portion of the Roman Catholics et al hereon are seemingly only too happy to
construe
that use as confirmation of their EXCLUSIVE CLAIM to the term.
THAT, TO ME, IS INTOLERABLY HERETICAL.
And I refuse to participate in that heresy, by using the unqualified term, if I can at all avoid it.
Now Mark,
I didn’t suddenly become so brainless as to call a rabid anti-protty any such thing!
My mom practically lived with her rubber tooth pick, trying to extend the life of her teeth. To her credit, she never had a tooth pulled (cavities filled, and bless her, she NEVER took anaesthetic which she followed almost to her grave (cancer)). I'm glad that you have working teeth now. How are the medium rare steaks?
WELL SAID. PARTICULARLY:
- - -
The ones making the most of the issue have already demonstrated a great deal of thin skinned-ness, and that is likely why nobody is taking their complaints all that seriously.
Moooommmmm, make him stop! I don’t like what he said and what I think he meant.
Sheesh. Don’t take such offense when none is intended.
Nonsense. I have had all my needles. I am not rabid.
Twin Peaks redux.
Last of the Summer Whine, now playing on Channel FR.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.