Posted on 05/25/2015 3:25:43 PM PDT by NKP_Vet
Western civilization is greatly indebted to the Catholic Church. Modern historical studiessuch as Dr. Thomas E. Woods' How The Catholic Church Built Western Civilizationhave demonstrated with force and clarity that it is the Catholic Church who has been the primary driving force behind the development and progress of the civilized world.
The Church has provided innumerable 'goods' for the benefit of humanity. Nonetheless, modern critics assert that no amount of good could outweigh the evil the Church has allegedly committed in contrast. Talk is cheap, however. We must look at the evidence. Has the Church really been an irreconcilable force for evil in the world?
BIG QUESTIONS
There are three principal issues repeatedly brought to the table by adversaries of the Catholic Church: religious violence, priest scandals, and ill-treatment of women. But do these objections hold water when their integrity is put to the test? And are they enough to render the Church "no good" in our final analysis?
Now let's be clear: throughout the duration of this piece, I am not seeking in any way to deny or defend the sins of any Catholic individual or group. The chief question I propose is not whether there have been malicious members of the Catholic Church (there obviously have been). The question at hand is whether the Catholic Church as a whole ought to be considered a force for evil.
Let's consider briefly the general assertion that religion is the chief cause of violence in the world. This position, in fact, is not supported by the data. Joe Heschmeyer has shown this quite articulately in his recent article at Strange Notions, Is Religion Responsible For The World's Violence?
Evil members of a Church do not necessarily indicate an evil Church. One must be cautious; because this line of reasoning commits an error in logic called the fallacy of composition. We would not say, "the elephant consists of tiny parts, therefore the elephant is tiny"; and thus, we should not say that the Church is sinister because she has sinister members. The parts do not necessarily define the whole; and in the case of the Catholic Church, the parts justify the whole. As G.K Chesterton writes in The Everlasting Man:
The Church is justified, not because her children do not sin, but because they do.
RECLAIMING THE HOMELAND
Sound historical scholarship has showncontrary to what modern textbooks might falsely suggestthat the Crusades ought not be considered such a black mark in Catholic Church history. Dr. Diane Moczar summarizes the facts in her historical defense, Seven Lies About Catholic History:
"To recapitulate: the Crusades were a response to unprovoked Muslim aggression against Christian states, as well as a response to the enslavement, killing and persecution of countless followers of Christ. They were not examples of European colonialism or imperialism, which lay far in the future, nor were they intended to convert anybody; they were a military answer to a military attack." (p.73)
Moczar demonstrates that the Crusades were largely just (see CCC 2302-2317) and with far-reaching benefits for the people of Europe. She cites historian Louis Bréhier, who also concludes:
"It would be unjust to condemn out of hand these five centuries of heroism which had such fertile results for the history of Europe and which left behind in the consciences of modern peoples a certain ideal of generosity and a taste for sacrifice on behalf of noble causes....." (from The Crusades: The Victory Of Idealism)
Steven Weidenkopf, a lecturer of Church History at the Notre Dame Graduate School of Christendom College, has also clarified the true nature of the Crusades in his footnote-laden treatise, The Glory of the Crusades. Weidenkopf's title is bold, but his analysis is fair and evidence based. In his scholarly assessment of the Crusades he carefully notes:
"To recognize the glory of the Crusades means not to whitewash what was ignoble about them, but to call attention to the import in the life of the Church." (p.14)
Moczar likewise recognizes that not all things regarding the Crusades are to be "glorified." Nonetheless, both Moczar and Weidenkopf decisively demonstrate in their research that, by and large, the Catholic Church's participation in the Crusades ought not be considered evil nor unjust.
HANDLING HERETICS
The real story of the Inquisition islike the Crusadesnot congruent with what one finds in today's error-ridden history textbooks.
Statistics regarding the total number of Inquisition-related deaths have been shamefully embellished by antagonists of the Church, with some asserting numbers in the millions. Though the precise numbers are foggy, recent scholarship has put the number of deaths at just a few thousand over several centuries.
Modern research by historical experts, such as Henry Kamen, Benzion Netanyahu and Edward M. Peters, have demonstrated that the Inquisition was not nearly as harsh or cruel as popularly suggested. Overturning traditional views, they have shown that the Church courts were often both patient and fair in their treatment of heretics. In fact, Church officials were so reasonable in the Inquisition process that heretics in the secular courts (heresy was also a political concern) would blaspheme with hope that they might be transferred to the more merciful Church inquisitors.
This is not to deny, however, that the actions of some Christians were unjust. Moczar concludes:
"Were there cruel inquisitors in some places? Of course. Were methods of interrogation distasteful to modern sensibilities? Sure... [But] given its formidable task of guarding the purity of the Faith in Christian souls, however, the overall record of the Inquisition in dealing with heresy is not only defensible but admirable." (p. 102)
CELIBACY ISN'T THE PROBLEM
This is not a defense of the guilty. It is a defense of the unjustly accused and stigmatized. The data is clearcelibate Catholic priests are no more likely to abuse children than clergy from any another denomination, or even teachers and other secular adult leadership. As Ernie Allen, the president of the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, has stated:
We dont see the Catholic Church as a hotbed of this [abuse] or a place that has a bigger problem than anyone else." (Pat Wingert, Mean Men, Newsweek, April 8, 2010)
Professor of psychology, Dr. Thomas Plante, agrees with Allen:
"Catholic clergy arent more likely to abuse children than other clergy or men in general." ("Do the Right Thing", psychologytoday.com, March 24, 2010)
Celibacy is not the problemand Dr. Chris Kaczor has made this decisively clear. He summarizes the evidence with this statement:
"The evidence is substantial and confirmed by psychologists, researchers, and insurance companies: Priestly celibacy is not a risk factor for the sexual abuse of children." ("Celibacy Isn't The Problem", This Rock, vol. 21, 5)
In his vastly informative book, The Seven Big Myths about the Catholic Church, Dr. Kaczor's research conclusively disarms the celibacy-leads-to-pedophilia myth and puts it to rest once and for all.
Indeed, Catholic clergy should be held to a higher standardthe highest standard in factbut it is unreasonable to condemn the whole priesthood because of the sins of an ultra-minority. There is simply no good reason to fear Catholic clergy any more than other religious leaders, teachers or the general population. I say without hesitation (and as a dad) that Catholic priests, by and large, are among the most trustworthy citizens of our society today. And the data agrees.
"SHE SHALL BE CALLED WOMAN"
Finally, is the Church's view on women really immoral? Let's begin with the fiery issue of "female ordination": Why aren't women allowed to serve as priests in the Church? Is this not a violation of gender equality?
Properly understood, this is a matter of the Church's incapability to ordain women due to what a Catholic priest is. It is the nature of the priesthood that makes female ordination an impossibility. These key facts may help to underline this point:
I) Jesus called twelve apostles, all of whom were men (Mk 3:14-19; Lk 6:12-16)
II) The twelve apostles ordained men only to succeed them (1 Tim 3:1-13; 2 Tim 1:6; Titus 1:5-9)
III) These men were given a special gift and authority to serve in persona Christi or "in the person of Christ" (see 2 Cor 2:10; John 20:21-23)
IV) Christ was a man; therefore those who serve "in his person" must also be men.
Therefore a female Catholic priest is about as possible as a male mother. The nature of the Catholic priesthood renders female ordination impossible, just as male mothers are an impossibility because of the nature of motherhood. Indeed, male-only ordination is discriminatory; but this is not a matter of preference but of deference to the "nature of things"; for it is the nature of nature to discriminate.
St. John Paul the Great understood this with profound clarity:
"The Church has no authority whatsoever to confer priestly ordination on women and...this judgment is to be definitively held by all the Churchs faithful" (Ordinatio Sacerdotalis, 4).
What was Jesus' attitude toward women? Once again, we turn to the words of St. John Paul the Great:
"When it comes to setting women free from every kind of exploitation and domination, the gospel contains an ever relevant message that goes back to the attitude of Jesus Christ himself. Transcending the established norms of his own culture, Jesus treated women with openness, respect, acceptance, and tenderness. In this way he honored the dignity that women have always possessed according to God's plan and in his love." (Letter to Women, 3)
Like her Founder, the Catholic Church reveres 'woman' and attributes to her the highest dignity. The mother of Christ, for example, has been widely revered by Catholics from the earliest centuries of Christianity as the mother of all Christians (Jn 19:26-27). No person in historyexcept perhaps Christ Himselfhas received more love and honour than Mary. The Church has also named four female Doctors of the ChurchSts. Teresa of Avila, Catherine of Siena, Therese of Lisieux and Hildegard of Bingenand recognized them for their extraordinary influence on the life of the universal Christian Church.
And is it not true that women largely tend to avoid places where they are unfairly discriminated against and patronized? If the Catholic Church really treated women unjustly, would we not expect a female aversion to the Church? Surely. But this is not what we find.
Notre Dame theologian, Catherine Lacugna, states:
85% of those responsible for altar preparation are women. Over 80% of the CCD (religious formation) teachers and sponsors of the catechumenate are women. Over 75% of adult Bible study leaders or participants are women. Over 70% of those who are active in parish renewal and spiritual growth are women, and over 80% of those who join prayer groups are women. Nearly 60% of those involved with youth groups and recreational activities are women. (Catholic Women As Ministers And Theologians, 240)
Women are not afraid of the Church. They are attracted to it. Why? Because she fights for the beauty and dignity of femininity as no other institution on earth does.
Referring to the words of his saintly predecessor, Pope Benedict XVI said these words in praise of women:
"As my venerable and dear Predecessor John Paul II wrote in his Apostolic Letter Mulieris Dignitatem: "The Church gives thanks for each and every woman.... The Church gives thanks for all the manifestations of the feminine 'genius' which have appeared in the course of history, in the midst of all peoples and nations." (General Audience, February 14, 2007)
FINAL THOUGHTS
In the final analysis, the Catholic Church is unquestionably a force for good in the worldindeed a force for greatness. She always has been; and because the gates of hell can never prevail against her, she always will be. We have Christ's promise.
Yes, the Church has proven herself to be the lifeline of our civilizationand without herhumanity will fail to thrive. As the great defender of the Church, Hilaire Belloc, concluded in Survivals And New Arrivals:
"If the influence of the Church declines, civilization will decline with it... Our civilization is as much a product of the Catholic Church as the vine is the product of a particular climate. Take the vine to another climate and it will die."
May God continue to bless His Church for goodness' sake.
Ireland still probably has among the stricted abortion laws around, being extremely rare. Compare that to other nations. I am sorry how they voted. I hope they don’t keep changing.
Your scope is too limited, and your glasses are to rose colored:
Pope Innocent IV, Ad extirpanda, papal bull, promulgated on May 15, 1252, by Pope Innocent IV, which explicitly authorized (and defined the appropriate circumstances for) the use of torture by the Inquisition for eliciting confessions from heretics.
Pope Innocent IV, Ad extirpanda: (25) Those convicted of heresy by the aforesaid Diocesan Bishop,surrogate or inquisitors, shall be taken in shackles to the head of state or ruler or his special representative, instantly,or at least within five days, and the latter shall apply the regulations promulgated against such persons.{7} (26) The head of state or ruler must force all the heretics whom he has in custody,{8} provided he does so without killing them or breaking their arms or legs, as actual robbers and murderers of souls and thieves of the sacraments of God and Christian faith, to confess their errors and accuse other heretics whom they know, and specify their motives, {9} and those whom they have seduced, and those who have lodged them and defended them,as thieves and robbers of material goods are made to accuse their accomplices and confess the crimes they have committed. (29) The head of state or ruler must cause the names of all men rendered infamous by heresy, or under a statute of outlawry for it, to be written in a consistent form and manner in four books, of which one shall go to the state or local government, another to the Diocesan bishop, the third to the Dominican friars, and the fourth to the Franciscans, and the names of these persons are to be read aloud three times a year in a solemn public ceremony. (30) The head of state or ruler must carefully investigate the sons and grandsons of heretics and those who have lodged them, defended them, and given them aid, and in the future admit them to no public affairs or public office. (31) The head of state or ruler must send one of his aides, chosen by the Diocesan if there is one,with the aforesaid inquisitors obtained from the Apostolic See, as often as they shall wish, into the jurisdiction of the state and the district. This aide,as the aforesaid inquisitors shall have determined, will compel three men or more, reliable witnesses,or, if it seem good to them, the whole neighborhood, to testify to the aforesaid inquisitors if they have detected any heretics, or want to expose their motives,{9} whether the heretics celebrate rites in secret gatherings, or scoff at the common life of the faithful, and their customs; or if the witnesses want to expose those the heretics have seduced, or their defenders, or those who lodge them, or those who give the heretics help. The head of state shall proceed against the accused according to the laws of the Emperor Frederick when he governed Padua. (32) The head of state or ruler must, within ten days after the accusation, complete the following tasks: the destruction of the houses, the imposition of the fines, the consigning and dividing-up of the valuables that have been found or seized, all of which have already been described in this decree. He must obtain all fines in coin within three months, and divide them up in the manner to be set forth hereafter, and convict of crime those who cannot pay, and hold them in prison until they can. However, he shall be subject to investigation for all and each of these things, as it shall be described hereunder, and moreover he must designate one of the assistants, chosen by the Diocesan bishop or his surrogate and the aforesaid inquisitors, to carefully complete all these tasks; another assistant shall be substituted if they so decide. (33) None of these sentences or punishments imposed on account of heresy, shall,either by the motion of any public gathering, the advice of counselors, or any kind of popular outcry,or the innate humanity {10}of those in authority,be in any way waived or pardoned. (34)The head of state or ruler must divide up all the property of the heretics that is seized or discovered by the aforesaid officials, and the fines exacted from these heretics, in the form and manner following: one-third shall go to the government of the state or district. The second as a reward of the industry of the office shall go to the officials who handled this particular case. The third shall be deposited in some secure place to be kept by the aforesaid Diocesan bishop and inquisitors,and spent as they shall think fit to promote the faith and extirpate{11} heretics, this policy prevailing in spite of any statute that has been or shall be enacted against this dividing-up of the heretics' property.
Canons of the Ecumenical Fourth Lateran Council, 1215: We excommunicate and anathematize every heresy that raises against the holy, orthodox and Catholic faith which we have above explained; condemning all heretics under whatever names they may be known, for while they have different faces they are nevertheless bound to each other by their tails, since in all of them vanity is a common element.
Pope Gregory I. denounced as worthless a confession extorted by incarceration and hunger.369369 Epist. VIII. 30. But at a later period, in dealing with heretics, the Roman church unfortunately gave the sanction of her highest authority to the use of the torture, and thus betrayed her noblest instincts and holiest mission. The fourth Lateran Council (1215) inspired the horrible crusades against the Albigenses and Waldenses, and the establishment of the infamous ecclesiastico-political courts of Inquisition. These courts found the torture the most effective means of punishing and exterminating heresy, and invented new forms of refined cruelty worse than those of the persecutors of heathen Rome.
http://peacebyjesuscom.blogspot.com/2013/06/roman-catholic-use-of-sword-of-men.html
The Dutch government was historically protestant. Is the King of the Netherlands Catholic? No, he isn’t.
The Catholic Church only became the largest because of the implosion of the Mainline Protestant churches in the 20th Century.
Spare me your indignation.
The inquisition, largely a political but somewhat religious situation was ABSOLUTELY a necessity in history for Christianity to survive...the Christians (Catholics) at that time were defending the faith...along came revolutionaries who destroyed cathedrals, libraries, monasteries, art work, iconology, people....whatever in their sick attempt to alter Christian teaching....the revolutionaries were as intent on destroying Christianity as the Catholics were in defending it....much history of Christianity was destroyed by the revolutionaries.....kind of like the ISIS of their times....if you don't like it, destroy it and since there had never been a need to defend against such madness, the Catholics depended on a violent anti-heretical policy to defend Christianity....very bloody, but Christianity survived....
Catholics were glorifying God, praising His name and paying Him homage for 1,600 YEARS before the word protestant was defined........good grief, read the book, Catholics protected it for all those years so you could see what was in it.....
The “word protestant” didn’t have to be defined. God knows who are His and who aren’t. Contrary to popular opinion, they don’t need to be labeled for Him.
I’m going to trust Henry Kamen, since he’s a leading historian on the subject. His book was the first non-polemical history of the inquisition in Spain and his research literally rewrote how the Inquisition is taught. According to Kamen, the Inquisition’s prisons were nicer than the secular ones and people used to confess to heresy to have better cells.
http://yalepress.yale.edu/yupbooks/excerpts/9780300180510_Kamen_excerpt.pdf
Strictly a political decision...while same sex unions were legal, the partners were denied any "couple"rights at all...probably unfair....the legislature wouldn't grant them any rights so they resorted to this disaster.....Abortion is still illegal in Ireland however.
You started with the following from post 27 in an attempt to show catholicism in a better light by claiming it has been non-cathlicism that is part of the problem in the Netherlands.
Youre right, the Reformed countries have done so much better. The Netherlands is a paragon of Christian virtue. Modernism is a blight that impacts every church.
To which I replied:
>> You do realize that catholicism is the largest religion in the Netherlands??
It amazes me the uninformed statements catholics make without checking before they post. <<
And then you replied in #36 the following:
The Dutch government was historically protestant. Is the King of the Netherlands Catholic? No, he isnt.
The Catholic Church only became the largest because of the implosion of the Mainline Protestant churches in the 20th Century.
Spare me your indignation.
You do realize you just made the argument that catholicism is the religion that has been impacting the Netherlands the most in the 20th century....at least since the 1950s/60s which is roughly when their decline began.
2013 statistics indicate 23.7% identify as catholic while 10.2% identify as protestant.
Somehow the majority religion isn't getting the message across.
Spare me your indignation.
However, it is noted that there is a Bible Belt in the Netherlands>
The Bible Belt differs in many aspects (amongst them a regular Sunday church attendance often twice on a Sunday) from the traditionally Catholic provinces of North Brabant and Limburg to the south (where Sunday church attendance averages between 2% to 3% [1] of the population) and northern parts of the Netherlands, which are traditionally mainline Protestant (dominated by the Protestant Church in the Netherlands[2]) and increasingly secular, with similarly low church attendance figures.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_religion_in_the_Netherlands
I do agree though that the influence of Christianity in Europe is waning to the detriment of that continent and Western society.
Well, I've learned more about religion in the Netherlands that I ever thought I would.
DO THIS....is the key part of that phrase....not why to do it.
Strictly a political decision...while same sex unions were legal, the partners were denied any "couple"rights at all...probably unfair....the legislature wouldn't grant them any rights so they resorted to this disaster.....Abortion is still illegal in Ireland however.
It is still a failure of the church no matter how you cut it. Same as over here in the States.
Sadly, there is strong support for abortion and repealing their 8th Amendment on this issue.
##A September 2014 Sunday Independent/Millward Brown poll found that 56% of voters were in favour of holding a referendum to repeal the Eighth Amendment to the Constitution, with 19% against and 25% undecided. In addition, 60% of voters were in favour of allowing abortion where there is a threat of the woman's suicide, 69% when the pregnancy arose as the result of rape, 72% when there is a risk to the woman's life (other than suicide) and 68% where there is a threat to the woman's long-term health. When it comes to allowing abortion "for other reasons", 34% are in favour, 38% opposed and 20% saying "it depends".[53] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_in_the_Republic_of_Ireland#Public_opinion
It sounds like if they chose to vote on this issue abortion would be available in Ireland.
Christians do "do this" in memory of Him.
This is a real hangup for you, isn't it??The scandal concerning priests and homosexuality was fairly shortlived, had to do with molestation of young men and was handled poorly by the church....That having been said, the incidence of homosexuality among Catholic clergy is probably no greater nor less that the incidence in any other occupation.....teachers, nurses, business people, attorneys....whatever.
Homosexuality, in and of itself is not sinful....acting on the urges is, and it is so for everyone, not just clergy.
Abortion on the other hand, which seems to be embraced by non=-Catholics is a MAJOR violation....
Sure it did, Catholics had to have a name for those who claimed to be Christian but instead of following Christ, followed such as Luther, Zwingley, Henry VIII, Wesley brothers, Storch, Simons, Knox, Brown, Smyth, Michelis Jones, Fox, Amman, Lindley, Otterbein...etc One must have a way to identify all those various "true" DENOMINATIONS, VS:true Catholic Christianity..........see how well it works?
“Other than that whole INQUISITION thing that set western civilization back a thousand years...”
There’s no evidence that the inquisition set Western Civilization back a single day.
They DO have a name. They’re called the Church the Body of Christ.
You're right, in every true Christian (Catholic) church, they DO THIS....consecrate bread and wine into the Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity of Jesus Christ at every Mass......and no, no one else does it.....no one.
Uh.. Cesear burned Alexandria. The Catholic church wasn’t around then. For that matter, Jesus wasn’t incarnated yet.
The question that needs to be asked, honestly, is “What Catholic Church?” The local one that teaches that Jesus was not God (or at least didn’t know he was)? The one in Lincoln, Nebraska, which is a lot more orthodox and straight shooting? The one in Ireland which is all for sodomites?
To speak of “The Catholic Church” is a misnomer. There are lot of churches with “Catholic” on the front door that are not.
At some point in the near future, many will have to choose what to follow. Just looking at the name on the door will not do it.
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.