Posted on 03/26/2011 12:59:03 PM PDT by Dr. Eckleburg
“Please also note that in terms of slaveholding, very few Catholics ever held slaves in the US - it was a predominantly Protestant practice.”
That is not really true either as many Catholics owned slaves in the USA including the U.S. Catholic Church it’s self, maybe not as many in volume as Protestants, they still were guilty of the sin.
“Two slaveholding states, Maryland and Louisiana, had large contingents of Catholic residents; however both states had also the largest numbers of former slaves who were freed.
Archbishop of Baltimore, Maryland John Carroll, had two black servants - one free and one a slave.
The Society of Jesus in Maryland owned slaves who worked on the community’s farms. The Jesuits began selling off their slaves in 1837.
Bishop John England of Charleston actually wrote several letters to the Secretary of State under President Martin Van Buren explaining that the Pope, in In Supremo, did not condemn slavery but only the slave trade.”
“
“Which means some people believe Michael Archangel to be God.”
That’s what I was implying, but I should have been more specific and said “Jesus” instead of “God.”
“I know the Greeks give Michael a place of prominence but I’ve never read they believe him to be God.”
It’s my understanding that Jehovah’s Witnesses believe Jesus and Michael Archangel to be the same people, although they don’t believe Jesus to be God.
“Do you believe the Archangel Michael is God?”
Nope.
“Prove it. Let’s see the numbers.”
It’s common knowledge that the Catholic Church is the largest “denomination” in the world and in America.
I’ve read a lot of threads before joining.
To some extent, someone accused of some crime IS treated as potentially guilty until a trial. One is presumed innocent until proved guilty. They cannot be jailed without a trial establishing guilt.
However, for an investigation to proceed, there is going to have to be some kind of presumption of guilt and inconvenience to the person, innocent or not. There is simply no way to investigate a case and look for evidence without some kind of presumption of guilt. What the law does is protect the accused in the meantime and prevents the accuser from acting on only a presumption.
When these incidents came to light, the priests should have been immediately removed from their position while a complete and thorough and RAPID investigation is made. People in other situations where they are being investigated for some kind of crime are sometimes put on administrative leave while the investigation is ongoing. Sometimes life isn't fair.
If his innocence is established, restore him to office. If not, throw his sorry butt in jail.
But to shift those men accused of impropriety around to cover for them and protect them while they continued to do it and not investigate it further, is unconscionable.
Sadly, the Roman Catholic church has a LONG and sordid history of sexual misconduct, easily going back a thousand years. That does cut into their credibility more than a little.
If they don't like the bad publicity, they need to remember that they brought it on themselves with the way this stuff was handled. If they don't want the criticism, man up and do the right thing.
Nobody will criticize them for acting appropriately when the situation comes up, as it is bound to now and then.
If Catholics exercised more self-control and didn’t defy the RF rules, they wouldn’t be booted.
Simple.
LOL! I love it :)
That is the convenient, disgusting and incorrect defense Rome pushes out as fact when it is actually a pathetic acknowledgment that Rome has no intention of changing anything.
The RCC prefers to trash married men and fathers rather than look within to solve the corruption at the heart of its ecclesiocracy.
"Everyone does it" is not a defense, especially when that accusing finger is pointed at men and fathers. Rome is not only antagonistic toward women in general, it is equally uncomfortable with heterosexual men.
The numbers declare what Rome denies...
Thirty-seven priests accused of sexual abuse of children in one city in one diocese.
Is that astounding reality lost on members of the RCC?
That fact alone should send Roman Catholic parents to pick up their children as fast as possible and get them out of parochial schools.
37 priests in one city in one Roman Catholic diocese.
Her priests have violated my law, and have profaned mine holy things: they have put no difference between the holy and profane, neither have they shewed difference between the unclean and the clean, and have hid their eyes from my sabbaths, and I am profaned among them. Her princes in the midst thereof are like wolves ravening the prey, to shed blood, and to destroy souls, to get dishonest gain." -- Ezekiel 22:25-27 "There is a conspiracy of her prophets in the midst thereof, like a roaring lion ravening the prey; they have devoured souls; they have taken the treasure and precious things; they have made her many widows in the midst thereof.
Yeah. Right. Whatever you say.
Yeah, that explains all the Catholic caucus threads which are allowed to stand, but when non-Catholics post a caucus thread and it’s dogpiled by Catholics who scream bloody murder when a non-Catholic dares to show his face on one of THEIR threads, they DEMAND that the caucus label be removed, and it has been, even recently.
Sure. Lots of bias in favor of Protestants and Calvinists. /s
/roll eyes.
Doesn’t cut it. That doesn’t explain that there are more Catholic threads on FR.
It doesn’t matter if there are more Catholics worldwide, which is pretty debatable anyway, if there aren’t more registered users on FR posting threads.
Sure it does.
which is pretty debatable anyway
It is?
That's funny coming from a member of a church that believes you have to eat Jesus to have Him in your body to impart eternal life to you and that when you had that fight with your wife, you had to go to confession again or go to hell, directly to hell, do not pass purgatory, to not collect indulgences.
I don’t see what’s so unbelievable about my claim to have lurked a good bit before signing up.
Given that the facts are quite the opposite . . .
RC blindness to those facts is persistently mind boggling.
I listed several examples. You seem to have ignored all of them.
I guess a falsehood is easier to maintain a death grip on when one flushes great big percentages, chunks of the evidence.
Very well put.
Thx.
That fact is denied by Roman Catholics who have concocted the bizarre "treasury of merit" whereby one Roman Catholic can take some of his extra grace he doesn't need and give it to another Roman Catholic who needs it more than he does. This is the soggy foundation of the selling of indulgences.
Bartering grace. Is there no end to their anti-Scriptural vanities?
Here's a good website I just found with lots of excellent links...
"The Pope has been given the office of doling out indulgences from a heavenly bank account known as the Treasury of Merit. This treasury consists of the righteousness of Jesus, plus the excess righteousness of Mary and the Saints. Indulgences are provided for the benefit of the living, who can then transfer them to family and friends in purgatory if they wish..."
If Catholics exercised more self-control and didn’t defy the RF rules, they wouldn’t be booted.
Simple.
INDEED.
However, ‘self control’
vs
!!!!DEMANDING!!!!
that FR conform to their sensibilities and direct Vatican control . . . seems to be genetic with the RC’s.
Meant to ping you guys...
If Catholics exercised more self-control and didn’t defy the RF rules, they wouldn’t be booted.
Simple.
CORRECTION:
INDEED.
However, ‘self control’
vs
!!!!DEMANDING!!!!
that FR conform to their sensibilities and direct Vatican control . . . seems to be OUT OF THE QUESTION with !!!!DEMANDING!!!! being seemingly a genetic thing with the RC’s.
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.