How does Rome and the Pope view Child Molestors?

[Carson Weber]

Hi A_Christian,

Funny, scientific studies have shown that there
is MUCH greater evidence for the FLOOD than there
is for transubstantiation

How is that funny?

Science can only examine the accidents of the bread and wine.

We confess transsubstantiation, not transformation.

The substance is changed; the form remains. This is undetectable by our senses, and so we cannot demand from science to detect that which is undetectable.

We know of this Real Presence of the God-Man under the form of bread and wine by faith in the Word of God in the same way that we know that Jesus is fully God and fully Man by faith in the Word of God.

No amount of scientific examination - while Jesus was walking on Earth during his public ministry, before his Passion - could have ascertained Jesus' divinity. His divinity is not subject to science; it isn't perceptible by the senses.

 

[MikeS]

Originally posted by A_Christian:
Funny, scientific studies have shown that there is MUCH greater evidence for the FLOOD than there is for transubstantiation...

If Christ Himself, in the flesh of His human body, walked into the finest scientific laboratory in the world, would they be able to prove that He was God?

Be careful what you expect from science!

 

[faithcontender]

I apologize if my statement was misleading, now that two people have said it was confusing. I wrote it early this morning, so I guess it made since in my head, but all the words didn't get fleshed out. We are called, by Jesus, to be holy as our Father in heaven is holy. Thus, just as we should expect the Pope to be a holy man, as was stated, I in turn expect you to be holy as well, and equally if not more so. That was my point. Hope that clarifies things.

I know that catholics expect the pope to be a good moral example but what is your reaction to the gross immorality done by pope alexander vi?

http://www.isat.ie/pope_alexander_vi_-_rotten_to_the_core.htm

 

[C.S. Murphy]

Originally posted by Daniel David:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Joseph_Botwinick:
These people are mentally diseased and at the least, should be locked up in a mental institution.

At the very least. A more appropriate course of action is to lock them up in some prison where they will be some bad guy's girlfriend for awhile. </font>[/QUOTE]Good idea DD. Your post reminded me of another potential problem, that of how many future sex criminals will be created by the perversion forced upon them by the priests. Your proposed sentence may not be that offensive to some of those fellas, atleast they seem to like men or is that just boys.

 

[MikeS]

Originally posted by faithcontender:
I know that catholics expect the pope to be a good moral example but what is your reaction to the gross immorality done by pope alexander vi?

http://www.isat.ie/pope_alexander_vi_-_rotten_to_the_core.htm

Let me turn the question around. What conclusion do you draw?

I guess I'll go on the record each and every post now that the criminals need to be in jail without exception, the enablers and incompetents need to be kicked out, and the disobedient, dissenting, defiant and heterodox culture within the Church that allowed or minimized the problem (including keeping Rome largely in the dark) needs to be hosed out of the Church like the filth of the Augean Stables.

 

[faithcontender]

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by faithcontender:
I know that catholics expect the pope to be a good moral example but what is your reaction to the gross immorality done by pope alexander vi?

http://www.isat.ie/pope_alexander_vi_-_rotten_to_the_core.htm
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Let me turn the question around. What conclusion do you draw?

I guess I'll go on the record each and every post now that the criminals need to be in jail without exception, the enablers and incompetents need to be kicked out, and the disobedient, dissenting, defiant and heterodox culture within the Church that allowed or minimized the problem (including keeping Rome largely in the dark) needs to be hosed out of the Church like the filth of the Augean Stables.

God bless you for being consistent in your conviction. Thank God you did not live in those times, otherwise you might be one of those burned at the stake by your catholic brothers or by the catholic church as a whole.

I just wonder why during that time the catholic organization were impotent to do anything against this evil pope? Did they believe that this pope still has the right to the "key of the kingdom of heaven" inspite of his horible acts?

 

[A_Christian]

Carson Weber:

Then why accept evolution? If science cannot
show Jesus to be the Christ, neither can it
demonstrate Christ didn't create just as the Bible
says.

Jesus healed the sick, calmed the storm, caused
the blind to see, and made the lame walk. He
even brought the dead back to life after 4 days
lying in the grave. Can medicine do that?
Jesus even knew what people were thinking and
their backgrounds.

If a substance is changed it MUST be different in
SOME way or it remains the same. You should
know that. Jesus was giving a visual aid to
show what would happen to him.

 

[GraceSaves]

Originally posted by C.S. Murphy:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Daniel David:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Joseph_Botwinick:
These people are mentally diseased and at the least, should be locked up in a mental institution.

At the very least. A more appropriate course of action is to lock them up in some prison where they will be some bad guy's girlfriend for awhile. </font>[/QUOTE]Good idea DD. Your post reminded me of another potential problem, that of how many future sex criminals will be created by the perversion forced upon them by the priests. Your proposed sentence may not be that offensive to some of those fellas, atleast they seem to like men or is that just boys. </font>[/QUOTE]Oh brother.

 

[GraceSaves]

Originally posted by A_Christian:
Carson Weber:

Then why accept evolution? If science cannot
show Jesus to be the Christ, neither can it
demonstrate Christ didn't create just as the Bible
says.

Jesus healed the sick, calmed the storm, caused
the blind to see, and made the lame walk. He
even brought the dead back to life after 4 days
lying in the grave. Can medicine do that?
Jesus even knew what people were thinking and
their backgrounds.

If a substance is changed it MUST be different in
SOME way or it remains the same. You should
know that. Jesus was giving a visual aid to
show what would happen to him.

Your logic is lacking, if even present at all.

Does it make any sort of scientific sense to believe in the creation of the world by God? No. And that is why science will never/can never prove God. And yet, believing this, you turn right around and demand scientific evidence that the Eucharist is actually physically Christ's Body and Blood.

Oh ye of little faith...at least when that faith doesn't tailor to your personal agenda.

God bless,

Grant

 

[mozier]

In all fairness to the people of yesteryear, most of them really were not that involved in who was the Pope and what he did or did not do.

If news reached anyone in that time that a new Pope had been elected in Rome, then their reaction would have surely been, "oh, that's nice." Then they would have gone about their day.

So any effect of a certain Pope's immorality would not have made really any difference in the lives of the common people. People of these times worked hard, died young, and had enough of their own troubles to worry about whether a Pope had illegimate children or not.


mozier

 

[CatholicConvert]

Mozier --

Interesting response. I think one of the problems we have in looking back is that we cannot imagine another life other than the one we are living, therefore, we tend to "imprint" history with our way of living and technology.

I would find it impossible to make a living being a peasant farmer. Yet millions did so without a thought to it. It was normal for them. It was also normal that they didn't have communication given to them about Rome, inasmuch as they lacked printing presses and Internet services. Modern communications has made this huge world a small blue marble upon which we all live. There are hardly any secrets any more.

I can easily imagine parishes and dioceses going for years and years without communication from or to Rome, living in a state of fidelity to the teachings of the Faith while Rome burned and they were ignorant of the goings on.

Cordially in Christ,


Brother Ed

 

[A_Christian]

GraceSaves:

You don't get it do you. What I am saying is
the very organization that accepts
transubstantiation doesn't apply the same
criteria to understanding Creation or visa versa.

I know GOD, by way of a pre-incarnate Christ,
created the world in 6 days. I also know that
Jesus was sitting with His apostles when He
spoke of the wine being His blood and the bread
being his body (he was presenting an object
lesson).

I also know that it's these sorts of inconsistances that has created havoc in Roman Catholicism and will continue to do so. Whether it be lecherous or drunken priests, or liberal Catholic professors, or parishioners who follow the traditions prescribed and yet are living outside the will of GOD during the week and
think their OK because they just had communion.
EVERTHING is related and the lessons are obvious
to those who want to follow the LORD, unless
following a church is more important.

 

[Carson Weber]

If a substance is changed it MUST be different in SOME way or it remains the same. You should know that.

I do know that, and as I've said, it does completely change. The substance changes, the form remains. How many times do I have to repeat myself?

Are you asking for the form to change? Do you need a sign to believe? Is faith not sufficient?

I know GOD, by way of a pre-incarnate Christ,
created the world in 6 days.

Have you ever heard of the framework hypothesis (M.G. Kline)?

 

[A_Christian]

Carson Weber:

OK, so you're saying that the wine & bread still
look like wine & bread but change molecularly and
chemically into the actual flesh & blood of
Jesus. This is change----if that doesn't happen
again, then there is no change. The bread &
juice remain symbolic with spiritual ramifications
only.

I'm not repeating myself, you just are not being
clear.

Sorry, I never heard of framework hypothesis or
Mr. Kline.

 

[GraceSaves]

Originally posted by A_Christian:
Carson Weber:

OK, so you're saying that the wine & bread still
look like wine & bread but change molecularly and
chemically into the actual flesh & blood of
Jesus. This is change----if that doesn't happen
again, then there is no change. The bread &
juice remain symbolic with spiritual ramifications
only.

So what is the point of your post, then? We believe that it DOES change. You do not. What is unclear about this that you continue to argue it?

God bless,

Grant

 

[A_Christian]

Simple, does the Roman Catholic church believe
that the Creation happened, as the Word of GOD
says, or does the Roman Catholic church consider
it allegorical? The answer is allegorical
because there is no scientific evidence
(according to evolutionists).

Does the Roman Catholic church believe that the
FLOOD actually happened or does it suggest that
the story is again and allegorical fable?
The answer is allegorical, because there seems to
be geological evidence lacking (according to
many-----thank GOD not ALL).

Does the Roman Catholic church believe that Mary
was born without sin and lived in a state of
perpetual virginity and was carried bodily off
to heaven at death? The answer is yes, even
though there is no Biblical nor scientific
evidence. There is ONLY TRADITION.

Does the Roman Catholic church believe that the
body and blood of Jesus must be eaten again and
again in order to keep eternal salvation. The
answer is yes, even though there is no Biblical
logic to this cannibalistic work of the flesh.
There is ONLY TRADITION.

Does the Roman Catholic church believe that
priests need be celibate and must remain celibate
in order to fulfill their station fully. Again,
the answer is YES. Even though Biblically and
historically this was not the case nor even
promoted as such. There is ONLY TRADITION.

What seems to carry the biggist sway within the
Roman Catholic church, the Bible or TRADITION?
The answer is clear to me and the results are
most obvious---even though ignored.