The Catholic Church has proved itself over and over to to put the "cloth" in front of the people by hiding pedophiles and moving them over and over to unsuspecting neighborhoods. And they have done so systematically for decades.

Go find a new Church! The people are NOT "Men of God!"

Yes, thank you..

The only element of the catholic church that is worthy are the convents of nuns, who are dedicated to comforting the afflicted and educating the young. The bishops are totally dedicated to collecting money and raping children.

So, Vatican is a big gay closet society ever? Good to know. I suspect for a while since all those meetings and parties took hours every night. Must be a big orgy party.

Kudos to the nuns who are putting a spotlight on the REALITY that the men in pointy hats can't grasp.'

'

'

'

This is the 21st Century...Sadly...this is what these women of God are up against:

"a prevalence of certain radical feminist themes incompatible with the Catholic faith."

When being a WOMAN is "incompatible" and subject to scoldings...the Church needs to be reminded that Jesus' best friend was Mary Magdalene.

Those of you who choose to spew your HATE at Holy Mother Catholic Church should be pitied. You continue to generalize and call all of our Bishops, Priest and Deacons pedophiles and rapists. Shame on you for you will be judged. Your eternal souls must have little meaning to you. Every independent study has shown that the sex scandals of The Church were less in real numbers than other demoninations and society as a whole. We have always been an easy target, as Jesus warned us. Holy Mother Church has been attacked for 2000 years and it as strong world-wide as ever and growing. In this broken USA modern trendy atheist growing country...our little time on top as the greatest country in the world is a joke...the Haters are winning...sadly. Yet the Church will survive despite of the Hate as we always have. Let God be your judges all you who choose hate and hate speech. May He have mercy on your eternal souls...and God Bless all the Sisters and their humble love of all and His Church.

You're being shrill. The Catholic Church church has despicable policies throughout the world. Open your eyes. (@james michael-585891)

James Michael said:

Every independent study has shown that the sex scandals of The Church were less in real numbers than other demoninations

Name me one sex scandal involving a Wiccan Priestess, Odinist High Priests, Hindus. Even the Sikhs.

Amanda --- Before the Catholic priest/altar boy scandal broke about 10-15 years ago we heard nothing about pedophile priests. Does that mean that there were no pedophile priests at that time? Or does it mean that the actions of such priests had not been discovered yet? re the Wiccans, Odinists. Hindus, Sikhs, et al <><> I, for one, do not doubt at all that pedophiles do exist among them; they just haven't had the spotlight on them as have Catholic priests. Of course, my gut feeling is that, as with RC priests, pedophiles among the groups you mentioned are a minority.

It's not that there where pedophiles in the Catholic Church. It the fact that the church protected them and kept moving then around for years instead of telling the authorities. That is what's disgusting. They decided to hide the truth and sold these children out in the name of god. I think the nuns have realized that the world has changed. Women no longer need to be subservient to men and the poor deal with some issues that the rest of us can't even imagine. How do you deal with the possibility of another child if you can barely feed the one you have?

"In a Thursday interview with EWTN, a Catholic television network, Cardinal Raymond Burke, prefect of the Vatican’s Apostolic Signatura, warned that the Leadership Conference could be shut down if it rejects the Vatican's mandate for reform.

“If it can’t be reformed, then it doesn’t have a right to continue,” Burke said, according to LifeSiteNews.com.

“How in the world can these consecrated religious who have professed to follow Christ more closely … be opposed to what the Vicar of Christ is asking? This is a contradiction,” he added." (italics mine).

With all due respect, why does the dear cardinal here insist on repeating the same dogmatic drivel that the RC church as been spouting for centuries - dogma that has been proven false time and time again.

A vicar is someone that acts as another's representative. One would therefore naturally expect the "Vicar of Christ" to be infallible in all his dealings. We know this is not true in the case of the popes at the Vatican.

Was the pope truly representing Christ when the Crusades were ordered? What about the Inquisition? What about placing perhaps the greatest physicist mankind has ever know, Galileo Galilei, under house arrest and forcing him to recant his "false teaching" that the sun was the center of the Solar System, not the Earth. And why is church dogma continually changing and morphing like a chameleon? Is God having trouble making up His mind about things?

If the "Vicar of Christ" got things wrong in the past, how can we trust him to get things right today? What is wrong here is that the RC Church does not believe/follow the Apostle Paul's observation in I Timothy 2:5: "For there is one God and one Mediator between God and man, the Man Christ Jesus".

Looking up "Vicar" in Wikipedia, we read an interesting fact: that the "Vicar of Christ" title was not used for the papacy until the 8th century. Before then, the pope was called the "Vicar of St Peter" or the "Vicar of the Chief of the Apostles". Assuming this to be true, why did it take them 7 centuries to figure out that the Pope was the "Vicar of Christ". Or was this done simply to assert power over the masses, a power they seem to be losing as evidenced by our story with the nuns?

My conclusion is that, for adherants of the Roman Catholic religion, you may blindly follow your "Vicar of Christ", assuming all judgments and decrees from him are infallible as Jesus Christ Himself is. As for me, I will take my chances and weigh my eternal destiny based on the mercy of God based on the righteousness of Christ and His shed blood on the cross for my sins, not in a human organization that has proven itself fallible time and time again in its 1600+ year history.

As it happens I am an atheist, but for the life of me I cannot abide the despicable lies told by some of the posters here about the Catholic Church. No one is, or should, argue that the Catholics make no mistakes, or deserve no condemnation for things they have done, or failed to do things they should have done. But for pete's sake people, the Bishops aren't all about raping boys, and the Church isn't about hating women. Are you people just insane?

The Catholic Church did wrong when it came to the sex scandal. Who can argue otherwise? But don't delude yourselves into thinking that all catholics are pedophiles--what a completely stupid thing to say--or that they even wanted this abuse to occur. There is something else odd about this, something the media and the church haters won't allow their simple minds to consider. Why was it focused on boys, and that we heard virtually nothing about girls being involved? Sure, the haters will say that is because they are altar BOYS, not altar GIRLS. Uh, how about no. Altar girls came onto the scene in the 60s and have become more and more prevalent ever since.

Could it be that the church, having been browbeaten for decades over their stance on homosexuality, found itself in the midst of a homosexual pedophile scandal? That because the church turned a blind eye for decades to seminaries that were graduating openly homosexual priests they were complicit in putting into place the very people who might do this wrong? And that because of the antipathy towards the church by the media and left within the USA the church was unable (still is too) to easily deal with this problem? To wit...had the church begun to defrock only homosexual priests, can you imagine the hissy fit the media and left would have had about it? So they took, instead, to trying to cover this up internally, and this was flat out wrong. But every aspect of their haters' behavior was wrong too.

And the church doesn't hate women, but the feminist agenda isn't acceptable to the church. Why should the church support abortion or birth control just because you dummies think it should? So if the nuns are supportive of homosexual marriage, or of abortion, or birth control, then the church SHOULD demand they reform themselves in order to conform with church doctrine. Otherwise it isn't a church, and is instead little more than a faith-based debate platform.

The nuns have a choice. Their choice is to move more towards the church (or get the church to move towards them, but this has obviously so far failed) or to leave the church. If their support of homosexualism, or of abortion or birth control, is based on principle, then it seems to me their choice is made. It's time to leave the Catholic Church and move into more leftist denominations where these leftist views have more appeal.

According to research conducted by The National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, the incidence of child abuse in the Catholic Church is no greater than that of any other religion or organization.

They just get more attention because of the size of the Catholic Church and the DEPTH OF THEIR POCKETS.

The TRUTH is that you'll find the largest numbers of pedophiles among the memberships of the TEACHERS' UNIONS. But, of course, since they are mainstays of the Democratic Party, that bit of information is ignored in the media.

The issue has been taken up by the New York State Education Reform Commission and the California Teachers Association recently used their political clout to block anti-pedophilia legislation in that state.

Matilda said:

Does that mean that there were no pedophile priests at that time? Or does it mean that the actions of such priests had not been discovered yet? re the Wiccans, Odinists. Hindus, Sikhs, et al <><> I, for one, do not doubt at all that pedophiles do exist among them; they just haven't had the spotlight on them as have Catholic priests.

No. The fact is that these religious leaders realize that abusing children is wrong and TURN THEM IN instead of transferring them from parish to parish, covering for them and paying the victims to be quiet. I'm wiccan, and while our belief is that "All acts of love and pleasure are My gifts" we draw the line at consent. A child cannot consent and when we find one that commits an act against a child they are turned in. You cannot say that about the papacy. I'm not talking about ALL CHRISTIANS, I'm talking about the Papal leadership.

Rich said:

If their support of homosexualism, or of abortion or birth control, is based on principle, then it seems to me their choice is made. It's time to leave the Catholic Church and move into more leftist denominations where these leftist views have more appeal.

The nuns do not support homosexuality or abortion, and nowhere in the Bible does it forbid contraception.

The Vatican wants the nuns to get involved in politics and go on TV and media and Congress and decry homosexuality, abortion and contraception. The nuns want to continue doing what they've been doing all along--helping the poor and needy. They don't want to get involved in politics.

Hi Amanda,

I'm not sure why you are speaking for the nuns, but okay. Everything I have read, so far on the subject, indicates that most of the nuns in the USA are not what we can call conservative orders. Most nuns, by far, are in more or less liberal orders. Of these, the acceptance of contraception is virtually complete. And your claim contraception isn't mentioned in the bible seems irrelevant to me given we are talking about church doctrine, not scripture. What I mean is that these things are what the Catholic Church has decided for themselves is meant by scripture, and so to belong to the church, at least to get communion (and what nun seriously could be denied communion and remain a nun?), one must accept these things. You don't, and this is fine, but it makes you non-Catholic.

As far as homosexualism all I can say is that if the church opposes homosexual marriage, and priests march against homosexual marriage, then when a nun opines that homosexual marriage should be allowed, and when the nuns, through their organizations, support this claim, it ought to be an indication that nuns often support homosexualism, a facet of which is homosexual marriage. I noticed, by the way, that you didn't make the claim that homosexual marriage or abortion are not in the bible. While there is no actual phrase as such, it is hard to imagine that homosexual marriage would be okay but that homosexuality would not be okay, or that life beginning when God breathes into the person would then mean nothing if one wanted to abort that life.

Anyhow, all of this is off the mark. The question to me isn't whether you or I know what the bible says about these subjects. Who cares about that anyhow? The question is about whether or not the Catholic Church can, and should, adopt its own doctrine, and then expect cathoic adherents to support it. If a church can't do this basic function, then doesn't it cease to be a church? Hell, couldn't anyone, even an atheist like me, then join the Cathoic Church and demand, through our organizations (and we would undoubtedly create our own advocacy groups) that the Church disavow the existence of God Himself, and yet still remain Catholic if told no? To me this is such an easy concept to grasp, yet most people want to argue, and in effect put their own imprint on it, what Catholicism should be for THEM, rather than what it is for the Church.

These nuns have every right to try to reform the church. Catholics, like every other religion (yep, even Wiccan) has changed and evolved over time. When, about 500 years ago, the Vatican was unwilling to reform itself in a way that was acceptable to reformers the reformers left! This is a viable option for the nuns too. So if they can't get movement their way, they should move away from the church.

“How in the world can these consecrated religious who have professed to follow Christ more closely … be opposed to what the Vicar of Christ is asking? This is a contradiction,”

So the feminists will have to make a choice - obey their superiors, or renounce their association with the Catholic Church. If they choose to split with the Church, I wonder how many of the Nuns will continue to belong to any new 'reform' group formed by the feminist leaders - especially if the leaders are excommunicated.

The idea that a few feminists in the United States can dictate policy to the leaders of the 1 billion Catholics in the World is radical in itself.

PS - I'm not Catholic, but I notice that there are a lot of comments by people who hate the Catholic Church and all it stands for.

I think the Vatican has said it's say. Odd, how the word "no", means nothing to them.

The vatican has had its say on many things. It's odd how the phrase CHILD RAPE means nothing to the vatican. And, to think some people still look to that pile of filth and decay as their Moral Compass. Funny that some people can't realize the brainwashing that occurs with religious indoctrination -- as if the Pedophile Catholic Cult's own example isn't proof enough.

Sorry Amanda, it was a long post but I did forget one major rebuttal to your claims. Your last sentence was to say that the nuns don't want to be politically involved. This is flat out false. Nuns have, for instance, been very public about their political support for "Obamacare", a facet of which just went into effect--"free" contraception. Forget the economic argument that nothing is free, or whether Obamacare is good or bad. The point is that nuns are often, and happily, politically involved.

ROY TWADDLE: PS - I'm not Catholic, but I notice that there are a lot of comments by people who hate the Catholic Church and all it stands for.

Really Roy? How many children need to be raped within an institution which actually institutionalized that child rape, protected the rapists for decades, moved them around to new hunting grounds so they could rape more and more children, all jsut to try and protect its own image...before you come to hate an institution for the tens of thousands of children raped, molested and abused within its walls? Those children and their familes whose lives were destroyed... that body count wasn't enough for you?

How about the fact that the Pedophile Catholic Cult also created, administered and maintained the Ratlines across Europe following Nazi Germany's surrender in WWII -- Ratlines which they created to enable scores of Nazi War Criminals to escape capture and flee safely to other countries that refused to extradite? This is something that the Pope has even apologized for -- but it was just another emply apology, with no remuneration to anyone, decades after the Cult's crimes were committed. Which is always the norm when the Pedophile Catholic Cult apologizes for anything...

Roy -- with every post you put here, you show that you have no conscience.

DMorgan "ROY TWADDLE: PS - I'm not Catholic, but I notice that there are a lot of comments by people who hate the Catholic Church and all it stands for.............Really Roy? How many children need to be raped within an institution which actually institutionalized that child rape"

So if studies show that the prevalence of pedophilia among Catholic priests is extremely low and is less than in other supposedly 'christian' denominations, you consider that 'institutionalized child rape'? Pedophilia among teachers is far more prevalent than among the Catholic clergy, but you seldom see any stories about that in the media.

I think you are a prime example of someone who merely hates the Catholic Church and all it stands for, and use this as an excuse to vent your hatred.

PS - My conscience is clear - I believe that practicing pedophiles in any religious order need to be punished, but I don't believe in condemning the 99 who are innocent along with the 1 that is guilty.

@ Rich,

I don't see anything in the article stating that these nuns support same-sex marriage, abortion, or contraception. Just that the Catholic Church wants them to be more outspoken against them. Not the same thing.

Hi Sandy,

If I confined my knowledge to this article then I would agree with you. But this isn't the first article ever written on this topic. In fact, this is a fight that has been brewing for many, MANY years. So are you saying that American nuns DO NOT support homosexual marriage, abortion rights, or contraception? Because that would be a different argument, one focused not so much on church doctrine but instead on the church's inability to be honest about American nuns and their political causes.

There are literally hundreds of easily accessible articles about this issue that you can google with the slightest of effort.

Rich said:

Hi Amanda,

I'm not sure why you are speaking for the nuns, but okay. Everything I have read, so far on the subject, indicates that most of the nuns in the USA are not what we can call conservative orders. Most nuns, by far, are in more or less liberal orders. Of these, the acceptance of contraception is virtually complete. And your claim contraception isn't mentioned in the bible seems irrelevant to me given we are talking about church doctrine, not scripture. What I mean is that these things are what the Catholic Church has decided for themselves is meant by scripture, and so to belong to the church, at least to get communion (and what nun seriously could be denied communion and remain a nun?), one must accept these things. You don't, and this is fine, but it makes you non-Catholic.

I speak for the nuns because I support their mission, and their message. I don't care if they are liberal or conservative. The difference between Church doctrine and Scripture is important because the nuns have vowed to obey God, not the Pope and the Church. If God and the Bible doesn't say it, they aren't required to follow it...and that doesn't include the stuff that's been added to the Bible.

And no, I was catholic and turned away from Christianity a long time ago because of blatantly un-Christian attitudes. I went to private school and was taught by nuns and never saw any contradictions between their actions and the Bible--but when I grew up, I saw a lot of contradictions between the males of the Church and the word of God.

As far as homosexualism all I can say is that if the church opposes homosexual marriage, and priests march against homosexual marriage, then when a nun opines that homosexual marriage should be allowed, and when the nuns, through their organizations, support this claim, it ought to be an indication that nuns often support homosexualism, a facet of which is homosexual marriage. I noticed, by the way, that you didn't make the claim that homosexual marriage or abortion are not in the bible. While there is no actual phrase as such, it is hard to imagine that homosexual marriage would be okay but that homosexuality would not be okay, or that life beginning when God breathes into the person would then mean nothing if one wanted to abort that life.

The nuns aren't advocating for homosexuality, they're arguing for equality. In jurisdictions where same-gender marriage is allowed (mine is one) they advocate for the same rights to be given civil unions as marriages.

When life begins is subjective. But God gave us women fertility--and he also gave us natural remedies to prevent conception and natural remedies that force a miscarriage--abortifacients. If he gave us both it stands to reason He would mean you to use both, right?

The question is about whether or not the Catholic Church can, and should, adopt its own doctrine, and then expect cathoic adherents to support it.

The Catholic Church can adopt whatever doctrine they want, although the doctrine should be in line with what their Holy Book says. When it doesn't they shouldn't expect others to adhere to it and when they start politicizing their views and forcing them on others who don't believe what they believe, then their doctrine has clearly diverged from what their Bible teaches.

Your last sentence was to say that the nuns don't want to be politically involved. This is flat out false. Nuns have, for instance, been very public about their political support for "Obamacare", a facet of which just went into effect--"free" contraception.

The nuns are advocating for healthcare made available for everyone--on the forefront of helping the homless and needy, they see the effects of uncontrolled reproduction maybe more than others. As they can;t give contraception out, supporting a policy that will give this to everyone will mean they don't have to see as many hungry children, making their job easier--and less heartbreaking, and fewer of God's children suffering.

If this is the only instance you can point out of nuns getting involved on either side of a secular issue, then you can't say 'often involved'. And I'm sure there were those in their ranks whodisagreed about their appearing to be on the side of healthcare for everyone.

ROY TWADDLE: So if studies show that the prevalence of pedophilia among Catholic priests is extremely low and is less than in other supposedly 'christian' denominations, you consider that 'institutionalized child rape'?

Yes. Because, what is the common denominator? Their belief in and their worship of the BuyBull and the mythical jesus creature. That the christian denominations, including the Pedophile Catholic Cult, have a prevalence of child rape and molestation isn't surprising to anyone!!

More from ROY TWADDLE: Pedophilia among teachers is far more prevalent than among the Catholic clergy, but you seldom see any stories about that in the media.

I'll never understand why cultists are such cowards. ALL DAY LONG they preach to everyone their Better Values, their One True Path to God, and the Higher Standards they hold themselves to. Yet, the very second they're caught in Bad Behavior, they fall back to comparing themselves to the common man and the common professions... Rather than Man-up and OWN IT, they fall back to: "oh, they do it, too. See them? They also rape children! What about THEM!!"

You people are far too cowardly to LIVE YOUR VALUES EVERY DAY, to hold yourselves to the High Standards you claim you hold yourselves to, and own your Crimes. You cower from them, you try to hide them in the shadows, you coddle the offenders, you try to protect the offenders and even allow them and encourage them to go into new hunting grounds and create more victims.

You've given new meaning to the words LOWLIFE and SCUMBAG. And you hide it all behind that filthy, goddam archaic BuyBull of yours.

But hey -- teachers do it, too! That should give you some comfort. And something else to hide behind.

Hey Amanda,

Far too much to answer right now as I have to run to referee. But you provide a target rich environment for me. I will reply later today. Thanks!

Rich-281385...the catholic church may not hate women in that way, however..name a woman in the top of the catholic church that is not a nun..Every so called leader of the catholic church is a man of one kind or the other. There are no women that have a posibility of ever becoming Pope of the church...ever....only men..or what passes for men are allowed. For that matter..name a religion that has a woman as pastor in any from ? I can not think of any. Thus far...all religions are against women....none are allowed a place of power in any church...and the allowed teaching and writings or only by men in whatever religion.....and no one seems to think that strange.

Actually, there are churches that ordain women as ministers. Episcopalian, Lutheran, Methodist, Disciples of Christ...

DMorgan "Yes. Because, what is the common denominator? Their belief in and their worship of the BuyBull and the mythical jesus creature."

Your hatred of religion is obvious. By the way - there were secular sources that confirmed Jesus existence - The First Century historian Josephus, for example - here's a link;

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josephus_on_Jesus

There is no need for us to change the Catholic Church to fit you Sister. The church you want already exists in multiple forms they are called protestant churches. I suggest the Episcopalian pick the right one and you can even have a funeral for your dog or cat when the time comes. The rest of us will be comfortable with you leaving and you can take the rest of the CINO's with you.

Amamda nowhere is anybody saying we don't agree with their work with the poor but some things in my faith are non-negotiable. Abortion, contraception and marriage. All these stem from the fact that we believe in God's continuing work of Creation and mankinds place in it. To add to it we believe God imparts the soul into the child at conception not some mysterious later date. The child is not your property no matter what SCOTUS says. In our belief abortion is murder of an innocent for which there can be no justification. I would suggest the sisters look up canon law 1389 or 1398 just to make sure they haven't broken that one. With their view of abortion I wouldn't be surprised if they had. Now since it is not your faith I respect your belief system. I do not respect the sisters since they have violated their freely taken vows. The church they want already exists there is no need to change the Catholic Church. They have the choice of every other Christian denomination formed in the past 600 yrs. I am sure one will fit just fine. I suggest Episcopalian or Presbyterian.

Hey Ivan,

Sandy already nailed it. Many denominations either ordain women or have them in prominent roles within the church heirarchy. You should know this as it is common knowledge. I'm sorry that you don't. But your lack of knowledge is not in any way any indication that religious sects hate or discriminate against women. That said, there are denominations that don't include women as leaders, pastors, and so on. But this too isn't an indication of any kind of animus towards women. I think you have to look at doctrine and policy to make those claims.

Hi Amanda,

My apologies for my many hours delay. You packed a lot into a single post, so forgive me if this post is as long, or worse, longer.

I think you mistake a major debating point here for something not at issue. No one is saying that nuns aren't trying to be faithful to their interpretations of what God is to them. The argument is over how the nuns support, or fail to support, church doctrine. I'm not sure what else I can say but that if a church cannot have it's own doctrine and dogma, then what is it? It can't be a church, since a church has to be a place where a community of like-minded believers congregates. So it's okay of the nuns don't want to accept church doctrine, but they can't, if the church says otherwise, claim to continue to be Catholic. They would, instead, become either a part of a reform denomination, or they could form their own sect.

I frankly do not understand your next major point of debate. It is incongruent to argue on the one hand that nuns aren't political (as you previously did) but then argue that nuns simply want equal treatment only in those jurisdictions where homosexual marriage rights exist in the context of a church that they belong to which disavows the concept of homosexual marraige rights. Those marriage "rights" aren't spiritually endowed, they are instead political contructs. So it's fine, again, if nuns want to normalize homosexual marriage, but to claim this isn't a political act in conflict with their srpitual oaths is just fatuousness.

And I get the point, though I disagree with it, that you think the nuns are following God's words and not the Catholic Church's, but, again, this can't be the case. If CATHOLIC nuns want to remain Catholic then they either need to conform to church doctrine or get the church to alter the doctrine. Your point seems to me to indicate these nuns aren't really Catholic at all, but are instead spiritual without any adherence to any church doctrine. In essence, these nuns can and should be able to decide for themselves what is, or isn't, their own church's teachings. I can disagree with the church and support homosexual marriage rights, or abortion rights, or contraception usage, but I can't continue to claim I am part and parcel of the church itself. If I could, then there is no longer a church. Which may be what the nuns, or you, actually want, but it isn't the claim being made.

Your claim that God would want you to use anything that exists simply because that is his gift is bizarre. God would want you, if you believe in God, to use things that resulted in good outcomes, meaning morally positive events. You might be allowed to do things which result in bad outcomes, but how could God want this to occur? Hence free will. The idea then can't be that simply because something exists, or can be made to exist (humans have created many things too and this must be natural as humans are natural) you should use it. So should we accept your ostensible (my point, not yours) claim that abortion, because the beginnings of life are subjective, is Godly? Or, for that matter, what would be my claim which is that life begins at conception and should not be ended absent a greater good argument, is Godly? Or that since life begins at conception that any and all abortions are abominations? However this question plays out it seems to me that nothing other than a conclusion that something good has resulted should be possible, otherwise how could God accept it?

If you are right that there is just one accurate reading of the bible and what God demands, then there would be no reason for different denominations. And yet we have dozens. Just within Christendom. So clearly there is no consensus on what God means. And this fact then gives life to each church. No one I know is arguing the nuns can't decide what kind of meaning exists within the bible, it is instead the issue that this church, the catholics, have decided at this point that what the nuns support is incompatible with church teachings. There are other churches which comport, more or less, with the ideology of the nuns. So let them move to those.

This is hardly the only instance I can relate where the nuns have taken a political position. But this is what this thread is all about, which is why I made that point. You can include food stamps, welfare, job training, and any of a large number of other issues to that list of political activities the nuns have undertaken. But there is nothing wrong with this even if I disagree politically with them. I'm not asking nuns to remain mute. I'm simply pointing out that nuns are not the apolitical social workers you claimed them to be.

Well done, ROY. Another cowardly reply. don't own anything, just shout accusations.

Also, your uneducated, nonsense blah-blah about "Josephus proving anything about the mythical jesus creature" makes me laugh out loud. This "suggestion" has been looked into. Many times. The assertion about Josephus is fraud.

Not one single passage purporting to be written, as history, within the first hundred years of the "Christian
era", can be produced to show the existence at or before that time of such a person as Jesus of Nazareth, called the Christ, or of such a set of men as could be accounted his disciples or followers.

Those who would be likely to refer to Jesus or his disciples, but who have not done so:

A.D. 40 Philo1, 40 Josephus, 79 C. Plinius Second, the Elder2Philosophers, 69 L. Ann. Seneca, 79 Diogenes Laertius, 79 Pausanias Geographers, 79 Pompon Mela, 79 Q. Curtius Ruf Historians, 79 Luc. Flor, 110 Cornel Tacitus, 123 Appianus, 140 Justinus, 141 Ælianus

Out of this number it has been claimed that one (Josephus) spoke of Jesus, and another (Tacitus) of the Christians. Of the former it is almost needless to speak, as that was given up as a forgery many years ago. Anyone with ANY education in Religious History knows that. However, for the sake of those who still cling to it, you haven't considered the following:

1. It was never quoted by any of our Christian ancestors before Eusebius. Eusebius, then, is the first person who refers to these passages. Eusebius, "whose honesty is not so great as to allow of our considering everything found in his works as undoubtedly genuine." Eusebius, who says that it is lawful to lie and cheat for the cause of Christ. [sound familiar?] This Eusebius is the sheet-anchor of reliance for most we know of the first three centuries of the Christian history. What then must we think of the history of the first three centuries of the Christian era?

2. Josephus has nowhere else mentioned the name or word Christ, in any of his works except the testimony above mentioned, and the passage concerning James.

3. It interrupts the narrative.

4. The language is quite Christian (Josephus was a Jew and died a Jew).

5. It is not quoted by Chrysostom, though he often refers to Josephus, and could not have omitted quoting it, had it actually been there then, in the original text.

6. It is not quoted by Photius, though he has three articles concerning Josephus.

7. Under the article Justus of Tiberius, this author (Photius) expressly states that this historian (Josephus) has not taken the least notice of Christ.

8. Neither Justin, in his dialogue with Typho the Jew, nor Clemens Alexandrinus, who made so many extracts from ancient authors, nor Origen against Celsus, have even mentioned this testimony.

9. But, on the contrary, Origen openly affirms (ch. xxiv., bk. i, against Celsus), that Josephus, who had mentioned John the Baptist, did not acknowledge Christ

The celebrated passage in Tacitus which Christian divines—and even some liberal writers—attempt to support, is to be found in his Annals. In this work he is made to speak of Christians, who "had their denomination from Christus, who, in the reign of Tiberius, was put to death as a criminal by the procurator Pontius Pilate."

So, consider the following:

1. This passage, which would have served the purpose of Christian quotation better than any other in all the writings of Tacitus, or of any Pagan writer whatever, is not quoted by any of the Christian Fathers. [oops!]

2. It is not quoted by Tertullian, though he had read and largely quotes the works of Tacitus.

3 It is not quoted by Clemens Alexandrinus, who set himself entirely to the work of adducing and bringing together all the admissions and recognitions which Pagan authors had made of the existence of Christ Jesus or Christians before his time.

4. It has been nowhere stumbled upon by the laborious and all-seeking Eusebius, who could by no possibility have overlooked it, and whom it would have saved from the labor of forging the passage in Josephus; of adducing the correspondence of Christ Jesus and Abgarus, and the Sibylline verses; of forging a divine revelation from the god Apollo, in attestation of Christ Jesus' ascension into heaven; and innumerable other of his pious and holy cheats.

5. Tacitus has in no other part of his writings made the least allusion to "Christ" or "Christians."

6. There is no vestige nor trace of its existence anywhere in the world before the 15th century.

7. The worshipers of the Sun-god, Serapis, were also called "Christians," and his disciples "Bishops of Christ.

So much, then, for the celebrated passage in Tacitus.

Now, for a man who was able to perform so many miracles and inspired such large crowds, why did no historian take notice write anything about him (that wasn't forged)? Josephus did write about John the Baptist, so…why not Jesus? Why didn't jesus himself ever put pen to paper? Why didn't the apostles ever write anything else, other than just the NT scribblings??

In a panicked, pathetic attempt to give their cult mythology some value and relevance, xians frequently overlook the details and facts which show it to be quite false. Kinda like you, ROY. It seems you people continuously lie, or cling to lies, in order to give yoru cult beliefs some validity, and in order for your cult creatures (like the jesus-myth) to seem more real to you.

And, before anyone comes up with any of these others, here: Thallus, Pliny and Trajan all post date Christ and make the same sort of references to christ that I am making in this sentence. (hearsay). If "Lucian" is Lucian of Antioch, then his source was the Bible, so he is also out as a corroborative source.

BTW, my disbelief in the existence of the man (ignoring his nature for the moment), is that he does not appear in any records or writings of his contemporaries. The Roman Empire was just too bureaucratic and chatty to not credit someone who caused such a hullabaloo…he would not have escaped multiple notations in various records…official, historic and personal. But, somehow, he managed to, even though he was such a controversial individual running around performing miracles and such...pretty ridiculous, really.

For Abe Lincoln, we have letters written in his own hand. Alexander the Great left a wake of cities, coins, and monuments during his day. Plato left his own writings and physically influenced numerous students. There is nothing similar for Jesus. All testimonials start up almost a generation -- several decades -- after he was supposed to have died. There are no records, no likenesses. Nazareth doesn't even show up in non-biblical sources until much later.

Does this all mean that Jesus didn't exist? Well, not exactly. The complete absence of proof like this doesn't directly mean he didn't exist. Does it mean that there's no evidence and all followers of the jesus-myth are having to make a leap of faith to believe that the gospels are true? Yes. Is that a bad thing? Depends on who you ask. Their body count throughout history isn't much to brag about, though, when contrasted with the teachings of their mythical icon... and NONE of this makes the jesus-myth a fact of history. However, to suggest that someone was this influential and iconic in this time period, and yet not one single shred was ever written down about him by his contemporaries, as history, is extremely unlikely and makes the concept of the jesus-myth highly suspect at best.

Inquisitors never listen, stay strong Ladies, don't cave to extortion or threats.

They may be fooling themselves, but it's in the best way possible. I'm not Catholic but I support them completely. In order for religion to survive it must evolve with its people, that those in higher power wish to remain stagnant only shows a lack of ability to progress and a desire to remain in power regardless of what their people call for. Keep it up ladies, stay strong and keep the message going.

American nuns are attempting to get the child raping Pedophile Catholic Cult to stop hating on some people.

This should be entertaining.

Actually, it seems to me they're being punished for paying more attention to the commandments of the Christ to feed the hungry, clothe the naked, and visit the prisoners--you know, the things the Christ literally told us to do in exact words--than the orders of a politically-motivated hierarchy seeking to establish theocracy in this country...

You are cueless..

Well, "cue"(sic) me in, JJ--exactly what are these "themes" that are so terrible? Don't know, do you? The reason, of course, is that the Vatican HASN'T RELEASED THEM. I wonder why?...

Lyrica -

The Catholic Church has been around for thousands of years, and it has yet to cave in to popular opinion. It doesn't seem to me that sticking to its teachings has caused it to become obsolete - I believe the number of those identifying themselves as Catholics is over 1 billion people worldwide. The Catholic Church is not a democracy. We as Catholics know that, and I suppose one can take it or leave it; regardless, the Church will not change with the political climate.

Ktdo410, you are absolutely correct. Those supporting the nuns are not Catholics who accept the teachings on life issues. I am seriously disappointed in these nuns and if they cannot accept the teachings of the Church, they need to leave and form their own church. Most Catholics that go to Mass and receive the Sacraments do NOT support these rogue nuns.

Catholic whole life.....support Nuns completely.......

The Catholic Church ( I was raised in it) doesn't have any common sense. Be fruitful an multiply. Well I'd say the human race has been pretty darn fruitful considering the world's population today. To tell somebody who can barely support the family they have they can't use birth control? Really? So stop having sex or have more kids. How is that helping anybody? I understand the Church isn't a democracy but that doesn't mean a bunch of old guys (who leave it to the nuns to deal with the real world) are right. Of course their own doctrine says they're infallible (despite the fact they allowed pedophiles to continue to abuse children). If you wanted to be the undisputed and unquestioned ruler of all your doctrine would also say you're infallible. Doesn't really mean you are.

Don't bother Sisters. They have no interest in anything you say. You are women and to them, beneath them. Keep helping those in need of help.

I admire people who lead by example. By wishing to continue the dialog, that is what these women are doing. Maybe the Vatican can learn a lesson. Then again, being realistic, probably not. But that doesn't mean you don't live up to your principles and not even try, as these women are doing. But they aren't stupid - IMO, the dialog will stop when they know nothing further can be accomplished, and I don't believe they'll cave. As Sister Farrell said, you can't stop the spring.

ktdo and Linda--sorry, ladies, but the teachings on contraception and abortion only go back to the Humanae Vitae encyclical, which dates, IIRC, from the 1960s. So much for that "thousands of years" tripe...

@Linda M-311663

By what you are saying, the Catholic church caused the Crusade, the Witch Hunt and all those atrocity in the past. Good to know that they never change.

So, the pedophile also happened in the past as well as recently. The church still continue to hide them just like in the past. I guess this is business as usual for them, the problem they have now is because "Society changes".

The whole point of being in religions are to follow the teaching of God, not men. I guess we all know what the Catholic is doing, following the teaching of men over god. Guess that is where they stand in the past and continue to do it even now.

Well mothers and sisters the vatican can't burn you at the stake like the good old days.

Keep true to the christ.

I have spent time with the BVMs and have been educated by them. Religious Sisters have had to claw their way from nothing in the "Church" to gain their own personal self worth. For too long they were relegated to "Sister will survive whatever." They were never paid (or given the Convent space as a "bone.") to teach in Catholic Schools and finally when they chose to move out on their own and get into the mainstream of GOOD jobs to support their orders, people looked at them strangely (like when they got rid of the clothing "nuns" always wore).

I have the utmost respect for the Sisters! They were in the front lines of the battlefields in South America and other lands, helping people regain their sense of self-worth when they were downtrodden. Religious have ALWAYS heard the call of Jesus when it came to fighting injustice and suffering of the poor.

And this is the thanks they get? They are following the Lord. More noble that the "Good Old Boys" in the Holy See!

ktd said:

The Catholic Church has been around for thousands of years, and it has yet to cave in to popular opinion.

Sure it has. Divorce used to be a sin and you'd be excommunicated; now it isn't. The world used to be flat; Galileo said it was round, the church came down on him for that. Guess what they're saying now.

And Monsignor Corrado Balducci, a theologian member of the Vatican Curia (governing body), and an insider close to the Pope, has gone on Italian national television multiple times to proclaim that extraterrestrial contact is a real phenomenon.

So yes, I would say that certain precepts HAVE changed with the times.

It doesn't seem to me that sticking to its teachings has caused it to become obsolete

The BuyBull itself, and its teachings, are obsolete. christ on a biscuit! -- so many of the followers never actually read that filthy goddam book to see what it actually contains. Most of the people who walk away from that filthy, cowardly cult book are the ones who actually took the time to read and study it objectively.

DM~ No offense intended but anyone who starts off condescending towards a group of people's beliefs and referring to their holy book in a derogatory term, isn't as open minded, accepting, or better off as they would like to seem. You may not agree with it, you certainly don't have to, but if you want your own opinions respected and listened to, you should probably extend the same courtesy and lead by example. Unless you're just a religion troll.

All honestly and accuracy, punkin. Like it or not.

I prefer to be blunt and honest. And I have no problem with being condescending to a bunch of cowards who institutionalize Child Rape, Molestation and Abuse.

Put me on ignore if you can't deal with the truth.

Sorry, your idea of truth is vastly different from mine but that's not a reason to put you on ignore. There's a difference between blunt and honesty versus cruel and condescending. Your version of accuracy and truth are merely your opinions, it's great that you believe in what you do but your actions don't make you the better person for it. If you can't deal with that, then that's your own issue. Judging from the 'pet name' and the aggressive tone in your wording (meant or not) it seems you're more a religion troll then a person who is open-minded enough to look at all sides of the spectrum, so have a nice day.

Well I am glad to see you are calling them ladies since nuns they are not. The nuns are keeping their vows these sisters are not. A nun is a cloistered contemplative order. They don't run around on buses supporting political candidates. They wear habits and crosses not costume jewelry.And they seldom leave the convent at all.Since this is an internal Catholic church thing as far as I am concerned I don't care what the rest of you think. For every member of the LCWR when you send me a begging letter include your answer to these questions if you want my consideration. When your order taught me about the infallibility of the Pope did you believe it then or were you lying then or are you lying now? And when you argued me down when I was ten years old on the issue of you can't do evil in order to do good. Did you believe it then or were you lying then or are you lying now? Unless you can answer those questions you won't get one red cent from me. And D Morgan think you are man enough to call ME punkin to my face? I warn you the last man who attacked me spent the rest of his life in a wheelchair.

Facts are facts, punkin, regardless what you may wish to call them in your lack of education!

Cheers!

I find it most intersting that once again we see men telling women to stay in their place and do what I tell you and STFU.

Well seeing as the nuns chose to take an oath of obedience, yeah, the Vatican is in charge. Get over it. They are the public face of the Catholic church to many of the poor. If they aren't in line with Catholic teaching, then part of their mission is already compromised.

For the infallibility of the church, didn't they try to kill Galileo for saying the earth circled the sun?

Infallibility applies only to morals and matters of faith. The earth revolving around the sun was neither.

Aren't they following the bible that was decided by a pagan Roman emperor that turned Christian only later on?

Old Testament already existed. As for the New Testament, I can't say whether Constantine ordered the writings to be compiled, but bishops determined what would go into the Christian Canon.

As man on earth learned more about how things work on this rock, they realized that thunder and lightning wasn't the gods fighting, that volcanos are part of a living planet, not angry innner earth beings.

I agree. I think the Bible would agree also.

Sorry, chum, the Church DID claim that geophysics was a moral matter! That was why Galileo was threatened with execution, and why Copernicus didn't allow his writings to be released until after his death, because the Holy Office did indeed consider the order of the solar system a moral matter...

...a pagan Roman emperor that turned Christian only later on?

There is no evidence that Constantine converted. The only bedside witness was Eusebius, and he was another classic "liar for jesus". Roman Emperors were considered gods on earth, and they themselves believed that. Thre isn't a shred of proof to suggest that Constantine ever disavowed that belief.

amen. i read somewhere that these good nuns stated that this could be the start of a new catholic religion. i will support the nuns to the nth degree. there are still latin masses and if you attend one, its against the church. i would prefer to have the nuns teaching my children reality, than the pope, bishop or cardinal teaching them about the boys club

WOW... ba ba ba baa.......... do you even know or read what you wrote????

ccmnxc said:

Well seeing as the nuns chose to take an oath of obedience, yeah, the Vatican is in charge.

They have sworn to obey God. They didn't swear to obey the Pope. The Pope is not God.

They vowed to live chaste, spread the Word of God (which, as I understood it, was to do unto others and to love everyone and help everyone) and be obedient and faithful unto God.

So far as I can tell, they have been faithful to God and lived a chaste life (ever heard of a nun sexually abusing little girls and boys?) and have done their best to spread the Word and teach love to your fellow man. They have been obedient unto God.

If God has a problem with how they have chosen to spread His message then let Him tell them. As He hasn't sent any bolts of lightning down on the nuns, one can assume He's fine with how they've chosen to interpret His directives.

The Vatican, meanwhile, has installed lighting rods all over the palace and the city...

@Conjuring Cat

I need a source. It also can't be a random bishop claiming it is so. It needs to be official (from the pope), or infallibility isn't in play. Infallibility isn't any random teaching from and Catholic leader. It needs to be the pope, on a matter of faith and morals, and is making a specific and official statement. I'm pretty sure that they were not all present.

@Amanda

My apologies, you may be right. My only issue with your post is this:

If God has a problem with how they have chosen to spread His message then let Him tell them. As He hasn't sent any bolts of lightning down on the nuns, one can assume He's fine with how they've chosen to interpret His directives.

You capitalize God, so I assume you believe in Him. Don't tell me you think He'd actually be so obvious when it comes to the nuns doing what they're supposed to. He didn't come to Elijah in the storm, fire, etc. He came in a whisper. I can't comment on whether or not the accusations are true, but if they are, I feel they need to be addressed, because many nuns and sisters are on the "front lines" so to speak. They interact with the general population, and they need to not only physically assist them, but provide spiritual and moral guidance. Speaking against abortion/contraceptives, and for protection of marriage falls under that category.

Of course we capitalize God. Some true believers won't say the name at all. Others capitalize all 3 letters. We also capitalize Allah, Buddha, all of the angels, and everyone else's name, even fictional characters and planet Earth. Now if god were simply a thing, like a lamp post, then no capitalization would be required. Whether or not you are a believer, God as an entity or just the notion of an entity is capitalized.

@miscue: The Tridentine Mass (Latin Mass) is not against the church. There are many Catholic places of Worship that will do the Mas in Latin. Foir them, it must be the Nostalgia.

ccmnxc said:

You capitalize God, so I assume you believe in Him.

Actually I'm a practicing pagan (read: witch) who turned away from Catholicism because of the blatantly un-Christian like attitudes around me. Went to private school as a child and was taught by nuns, but after seeing a pregnant woman raped by the chaplain of the deportation camp I was in for three years, I turned away from Christianity and became a pagan.

I capitalize 'God' because it is a proper noun for a person, place, or thing; my religion also teaches that there is no one true way, and the way that Is good for me isn't necessarily going to be good for you because how you look at the world is different from how I look at the world. So I have no problem respecting Christianity religion even though you disresect mine.

Don't tell me you think He'd actually be so obvious when it comes to the nuns doing what they're supposed to.

Why not? if He really is all powerful he'd have no problem sending plagues of frogs or boils or a biblical flood that turns the Earth into a waterworld. Certainly didn't seem to have a problem doing that back in the Old Testament days, so what changed?

And I wasn't joking--the Vatican has been hit by lightning--many times, in fact--and they now have lighting rods installed all over the place.

Seriously, I suggest a lot of people on this line actually study the Doctrine of Papal Infallibility before commenting on it. It might also be helpful if they would inform themselves of the true stance of the Church on certain other issues before they insert their feet in their mouths and comment on them also, too, as well. All this does not mean that I personally agree with EVERYTHING the Church holds, but I do try my best to actually study her doctrines so I will actually know what they say before disagreeing with them.

learned very early in my life there are two things NOT worth arguing about...politics and religion.

i have never seen a clear winner, in the many arguments i have witnessed in my life, that had a winner or loser, just two sides that disagreed before and after that argument.

Amanda: The Pope is not God.

Careful, Amanda. You may just get hit by a bolt of lightning coming down from Mt Olympus.

Oh wait -- i think I have my cult mythologies confused. Zeus wore some funny hats and clothing and carried a big, shiny Sceptre of Self-Importance, too. So easy to transpose those characters!

The Latin mass is an extraordinariate. One of 2-3 extraordinariates in the RCC. One being for those Anglican churches that rejoined the RCC they get to keep the Common Book of Prayer as their service. Well Amanda the Catholic church seems to respect your ways more than you do ours CCC paragraph 843 So if that is true why are we the ones getting called intolerant

The Catholic Church is run by God. His ministers may be bat-$5^ crazy at times; but, even the legendary Borgia popes never publicly contradicted dogma. These good sisters need to continue to pray, not for what they want; but, for what God wants from them.

I find something comforting that it took 400 years for the Church to exonerate Galileo. It shows that God works on his own time, not ours.

The Catholic church is NOT "run by God"!! It's not run by Jesus, either! In fact, THERE ARE NO CHURCHES RUN BY GOD OR JESUS!! Religions were created by people (primarily MEN) who use fear and guilt to force people into compliance and extract money from them. The biggest joke on the planet is using the word "morality" in association with any church or church leadership. The most immoral people I've ever met have been members of various church clergies. (And not contradicting dogma "publicly"--rather, doing so privately--doesn't make one morally superior to anyone. It simply means you're a closeted lying skank!)

These nuns ARE doing what God and/or Jesus mandated all of us to do. In fact, they are actually doing what any loving, caring, MORAL human being would do--whether they have any type of religious belief, or not.

AntiPropagandist: The Catholic Church is run by God.

If you're anti-propaganda, then start with your own. You cannot prvide any evidence to show that your cult god exists, or any cult god exists for that matter. Almost two millenia have passed, and none of the planet's Cults have ever been able to prove their divine cult claims. So, it only makes you look foolish when you state such silly things as facts -- especially when you claim that your god has inspired such a poorly written book (the BuyBull) that it's followers fraction off into thousands of different denominations, all who interpret and worship it and its tenets differently, because it is so goddam confusing to them, and so poorly written, and hardly any of them can mutually agree upon what it says or prescribes or demands of its followers. The BuyBull is solely responsible for inspiring more hatred, violence, mass murder and killing than any other cult book in earth's history -- if any of the earth's cult creatures are real, then the likely "inpirational author" of that filthy goddam book was the Devil.

Do yourselves another favor -- read Dawn L's comments, immediately above mine. She hit the nail on the head.

amen.

Amen. But, I think that history tells us that this is not a reality. Like he took down the tower of Babel. Me thinks the Lord will unfortunately take down some aspects of the Catholic Church hierarchy leaving only good Nuns and priests who want to truly do the Lord's work.

Amen I say to THIS!

57000 nuns, at an average age of 70. The number of priests at the Vatican, maybe about the same, and the same age too? They are a failed group of spiritual guides, not known now for anything but poor leadership, in fighting and bickering, and covering up major crimes against humanity...and greed. In the days when they could get their greedy hands on the gold and silver of the new world, or other lands of conquest, through the abuse of native slave labor and illiteracy things were working for them. But in this day and age of science and technology, there answers to the worlds questions aren't pertinent. It's the FARMERS THAT FEED THE WORLDS HUNGRY, NOT THE CATHOLIC CHURCH. It;s MODERN HEALTH CARE PRACTICES WHICH CURE THE SICK, not the CATHOLIC CHURCH. The reason there are so few priests and nuns, is because they are not needed. Lay people are providing where they once provided at services. The leadership of the Catholic Church has failed, and that's that. The glory days are over...they are not coming back.

Jeff King --- The RC has NEVER forbidden the masses private ownership of bibles. However, until the printing press they were SO EXPENSIVE that effectively they were kept out of the hands of the common people for that reason alone, not because the RC forbade them. That is why bibles were often displayed in churches, so that the common people (the few who could read) had access to them.

Matilda -- YES the RC HAS forbidden the private ownership of bibles. Until the 1500's or 1600's, it was illegal to own or possess a bible. If you were found with one, it was punishable by death. And believe that many people were put to death. The church was afraid that if people could read and understand and question the bible for themselves, then they would question why they need the church. How could the church continue to get money and hold onto it's power if people stopped needing them? It was selfish and self serving. 300 years after the printing press, people were still being put to death for possessing a bible. Do your research.

About 25 years ago, I remember a catholic friend of my Mom's telling her that it wasn't until the last couple of decades that the church encouraged people to read/study the bible on their own. ost people in the U.S. didn't read latin anyway.

The Bible is only mans INTERPRETATION of what God said or meant. NO ONE KNOWS EXCEPT GOD. Show me a bible that God ACTUALLY WROTE. THERE ISN'T ONE.

Better yet. Show us PROOF THAT ANY GOD EXISTS. There isn't any.

"Cardinal Raymond Burke, prefect of the Vatican’s Apostolic Signatura, warned that the Leadership Conference could be shut down if it rejects the Vatican's mandate for reform." I was just wondering how? If the nuns are holding their own conference, what is the Vatican going to do, stand in front of the door and tell them they can't meet? Yeah, right. Those ladies can just go down the street to another place, and meet there. Tough noughies.

If any place needs reform, it's the VATICAN! It has denied it's own reason for being -- which is following the teachings of Jesus. All the dogma that has come afterwards has never been valid to the original statements. I think the nuns have it right. The Pope and his yes men need a comeuppance, and they need to ask for forgiveness. (I know, I know, but if they are going to preach the "word," they should know what that word is.)

BTW, I resigned from Christendom a long time ago, and I have found a different path. A good deal of my decision has been based on the negative behavior of such "Christians." I want no part of this kind of belief system. I would rather help the poor, feed the hungry, and take care of those who need help. And I don't need anyone's permission to do that.

zapper said:

I resigned from Christendom a long time ago, and I have found a different path. A good deal of my decision has been based on the negative behavior of such "Christians." I want no part of this kind of belief system.

Ghandi said something along those lines:

"I like your Christ. I would like Christians more if you were more like your Christ."

I too turned my back on Christianity after seeing the blatantly un-Christian like attitudes of those around me.

Well said, Amanda!

I doubt it.

They don't even hold the Pedophile Catholic Cult criminally responsible for institutionalized Child Rape.

Just what the hell does the ACLU have to do with this? The structure of the Church--which is not a part of the government--is not in their purview. But hey, any stick with which to beat the ACLU dog, eh?...

Conjuring, 'If' the 'Church' isn't part of the government, why are the GOP hiding behind the 'Church' and promoting religion in legislation?

Bubba, the "wall of separation" between church and state works both ways. The state is not allowed to dictate to a religion who it must hire or place in particular positions if such hiring or placement is contrary to the tenets of that religion.

Fantomdog, you need to learn the difference between lunatic fringe fundamentalists and the Roman Catholic Church. Catholic priests have been defrocked and excommunicated for teaching some of the doctrines that the lunatic fringe fundies hold dear and the lunatic fringe fundies don't even accept that the Roman Catholic Church is Christian. And the Republican doctrine is driven more by the lunatic fringe fundies than by Catholics.

because if you hadn't noticed Fantomdog, touting their religion makes politicians look more human and more appealing. Christian voters are more likely to vote for a christian politican compared to a christian voting for a mormon. Birds of a feather flock together. Also makes it easier to get eaten by a cat.

Fantomdog, you need to learn the difference between lunatic fringe fundamentalists and the Roman Catholic Church.

I see no difference between the label LUNATIC FRINGE FNDAMENTALISTS and a group who has institutionalized Child Rape and has protected the rapists for many decades.

That is a very telling point--the same Church that burned Jeanne d'Arc canonized her 400 years later, so not only can the Church be wrong on doctrinal matters, it has in the past admitted it. But 400 years is rather a long time, you know...

Don't forget the Mary Magdalene Prostitute Myth, finally admitted that was a made up dogma.

Would you all please look up "doctrine" and "dogma" in a dictionary. You obviously haven't a clue as to what either means.

todd... Are you refering to Pope Pius XII who sat idly by while millions of men, women and children were murdered by the Nazis? He was probably too busy counting his money. signed: A recovered Catholic.

"And Jesus went into the temple of God, and cast out all of them who sold and bought in the temple, and overthrew the tables of the moneychangers, and the seats of them that sold doves, and said unto them, It is written, My house shall be called the house of prayer; but ye have made it a den of thieves."

Child molesters, a doctrine of hate and judgment, vaults of valuables, a Bank on the property, Is there really any doubt what Jesus would do with the Vatican?

Sister Mary MacKillop, an Austrailian nun excommunicated by the bishop is now a saint for turning in a pedophile priest.

Even the Vicar of Christ was abused during thr Renaissance era. How do you think many of our Saints came about? They challenged ther Church: and BTW, more than a few of them were WOMEN!

Conjuring Cat, the Roman Catholic Church as a whole did not burn Joan of Arc. She was captured by the English and her trial was held by the English and her burning was at the behest of the English. Several members of the court were there under compulsion, with death threats made against them by the English. The Vatican did not order her burning, that was done by Bishop Cauchon who under church law had no authority to issue such a ruling. Once the war was over and the Vatican had access to all parties the matter was investigated and the ruling was overturned 25 years after her death. Bishop Cauchon had died in the interim so there was no opportunity for the Church to discipline him for his actions.

How can you go against the Vicar of Christ and still represent the teachings of Christ?

Wow. Seriously? The Pedophile Catholic Cult has a LONG history of being and acting un-christ-like in so many examples.

Care to tell me where BURNING PEOPLE TO DEATH is a teaching of christ? How about RAPING CHILDREN and instutitionally PROTECTING THE RAPISTS? Helping NAZI WAR CRIMINALS escape capture after the German surrender in WWII? Ignoring the starving people out on the front steps of the Vatican, while the Vatican's residents walk around in halls of gold, wearing millions in gaudy jewelry, walking past millions in art, and all of them, farting through silk boxer shorts and silk linen robes -- the mythical jesus creature speaks in the BuyBull of helping, feeding, clothing and protecting the poor and of shunning wealth and shunning the hoarding of worldly possessions more than any other teachings. THE VATICAN IS THE ANTITHESIS OF THOSE TEACHINGS!

Are you people THAT FOOLISH that you don't even know your own hypocrisy, let alone the hypocrisies of the most FOUL of religious cults on the planet???

Are you aware of what these nuns make/earn a year? You will wished you were a nun and joined them....

jj, so tell us, Executive Wall Street Wages?

Not sure where you got your information, JJ, but I used to process payroll for several Catholic hospitals and the Sisters, even those at the very top, were paid very little. Some were only paid $1.00 per year whereas a few others were paid up to the FICA max (less than $100k at the time). This was in the 1980's.

Yeah, frank, it seems they would rather have the sisters be political agents than agents of the Christ's teachings. To hell with feeding the hungry--get out there and stump against legal abortion, girls!...

Nice try. But there are poor starving people right outside the Vatican itself. Poor people whom the vatican ignores every day. they ignore them, while they walk around in silk robes, farting thru silk boxer shorts, wearing millions in jewelry, walking past millions in art and wall hangings -- hoarding wealth, which goes against the teachings of the jesus-myth, ignoring the directive to help, clothe and feed the poor in favor of hoarding wealth, which also goes against those teachings.

EPIC FAIL.

So the Church is never wrong, is it? Tell that to Joan of Arc, Galileo, Corpernicus, etc. etc. etc....

I guess when the Sisters got out into the real world they decided the Least of His needed ministering to. Nonsense, this is the 21st. Century and not back to an Augustine time warp.

They have sworn to obey God. They didn't swear to obey the Pope. The Pope is not God.

If God has a problem with how they have chosen to spread His message then let Him tell them. As He hasn't sent any bolts of lightning down on the nuns, one can assume He's fine with how they've chosen to interpret His directives.

JJ-2216304... When people who are honestly mistaken learn the truth, they will either cease being mistaken or cease being honest.

@JJ - Cardinal Law - is that you?

Please do clarify what it is that the nuns are doing or advocating that is contrary to the Scriptures and church teachings?

Funny, rusty, they haven't cited anything specific. Perhaps because there isn't any there there and the Vatican is just browbeating them into being political lobbyists?...

Historically, the papacy has gotten away from the doctrines of Christ more than once to pursue frankly political ends. During the Renaissance, most popes were frankly political leaders with little interest in Church doctrine. One of the most telling reasons why Martin Luther gained as much traction as he did was that Leo X was too busy playing politics and making war against other Italian princes to pay any attention to what was actually going on in the Church at the time. Had he had the wit or the attention span to stomp on John Tetzel, the reformation need not have even happened. With what results who can tell...

Let's face it, Catholicism is an institutional religion that's played out. Good-bye, real estate; good-bye, bingo nite.

The nuns must jettison the ancient, corrupt Vatican infrastructure in order to carry on teaching Jesus' original agenda of kindness, generosity, and forgiveness. Yes, you might make the argument that Jesus now sounds like some kind of trouble-making revolutionary communist. He apparently didn't molest children or wear brocade caftans, yet he seemed to be somewhat inspirational.

Or we can all keep passing the collection plate to pay the lawyers.

Oh, Cardinal--look to your own first.

Monsignor Corrado Balducci, a theologian member of the Vatican Curia (governing body), and an insider close to the Pope, has gone on Italian national television multiple times to proclaim that extraterrestrial contact is a real phenomenon.

Benji2... Bingo! Thank you.

Benji2....I totally agree. Death Penalty, unjust wars, starving poor, access to healthcare, just wages, equitable taxation...none of that matters to him as long as you vote against abortion. I was quite pleased when he left St. Louis.

Yep. Do your homework on the current pope. In particular when and where he grew up. You'll be trippin.

I think the pope needs to get his own house straight before he appoints Sartain to bully the nuns. I'm not Catholic but I'm not blind either. I see the good work nuns do. Kinda irks me the Vatican will look past all the good they do to call them on the carpet for something they're not happy with.

Archbishop J. Peter Sartain - The nuns haven't been protesting/picketing abortion clinics or holding gay bashing events because they're busy. They're busy helping the homeless, people living in poverty, people that need God's help. Put that in your report to the Vatican and tell the pope to step off!

Speaking of homoework, do some research on papal infallibility. You seem to be under the (false) impression that everything the pope says and does is supposed to be correct. So let's set it up for you. They have to be speaking as the successor of Peter (they are the pope). They need to be speaking on a matter of faith and morals. The pope needs to make and official statement and declare it as infallible. Make more sense?

And since the Pope gets to decide what is a matter of faith and morals, ccmnxc, he doesn't have any real restriction on when to invoke the doctrine of infallibility, does he?...

Cat, if you investigate you will find that there have been less than a dozen invocations of papal infallibility in the entire history of the Church. The last one was in 1950. It's not something that is done lightly.

Cat, if you investigate you will find that there have been less than a dozen invocations of papal infallibility in the entire history of the Church

Wow! Well, let's give them a trophy!

ccm..... I'm quit aware of the doctrinaire concept of papal infallibility. my point was that the nuns seem to have an equal footing in what they say because of the not so pretty history of the church.

I would agree with almost everything you said except they are not holding true to ALL the Christian beliefs that ALL Christians vow to follow when they make the vow to follow God and his will.

To which beliefs are they not holding true?

after reading the cult book, BuyBull, every person has a different interpretation of what "god's will" is. and every cult building the uses the BuyBull to preach, preaches a different meaning about what they interpret what god's will is.

not a single cult group can even prove that their god exists, yet they all claim to know his thoughts, his wants, and his WILL. and every goddam group interprets it differently.

so, take a moment and GET REAL, will ya?

Andy, am open to something positive regarding religious news, got anything?

yeah, Olivia, you're a real atheist. And my name is Alexander Sidneycrosbybich Ovechkin...

yeah, an atheist who hits all the Faux Nooz talking points with perfect reliability is about as atheist as Paddy Robertson...

catholic hospital save hunedered of lives today,catholic colleges graduate hundereds student today, catholic charity out give all others including US goverment, catholic church defend the lives of children borned and unborned,catholic church defends marriage has one woman to one man,thousands of catholic ordained never have and never will molest any body.for more detail look it up

Ummmm Olivia, care to state what 'normal' is? Come on, give it a whirl, Psychologists around the world would like to be enlightened by your 'expertise' on the subject.

Andy: i'm actually amazed that this piece of religious news made it to the front page. I'm not surprised, however, since coverage of religious news makes the headlines only if it appears to be negative".

It's the fault of the RELIGIOUS for creating so much negative news with their own behavior. jesus h nipple, place the blame where it belongs! You people complained when the stories made the news about the families who prayed over their sick children and watched them die, instead of taking them to a doctor! Well, what did you expect? You complain when the news reports more catholic and christian leaders raping children. Well, what did you expect?

christ on a biscuit ---- get real, you clowns!

Throw these women satan diciples out on the street now. No time to waste. Women cant help themselves from allowing empathy to over ride gods commandments. Empathy is Satans sneaky way of ruling over us.

Irrational empathy from women is what destroyed Americas moral fiber. Women that, women this, this is all I hear about in the media in the last 20 years. Now look at the USA now.

Men are rough and men are crude but they do a far better job of staying rational instead of women.

You're correct!

Women aborting (killing) children and all we hear about is suspected molestation?

Killing children is a felony crime. What on earth are you talking about? More of your unprovable assertions about zygotes and embryoes??

Empathy is Satans sneaky way of ruling over us.

Wow. It's WHACKADOO DAY today