Which do the catholics believe?

[ÃÂoppleganger]

first the percent of catholic priest who have done this is between .07% and 1.3% protestant ministers are 1.5% and 2.1% and teachers are 33%.... yes we have judas' just as Jesus does and just as you do. God did not ordain anarchy like a free for all

This is just reported cases, not even cases that were settled outta court.

many words are used by different cultures and religions. yes we changed the day to sunday we put the bible together we defined the trinity. im assuming you're a JW?

Or so you say, nope I'm not a Jehovah's Witness, or as clever as you or them!

Are not to be considered valid arguments that something is not a miss? and what year did the Jws appear?

So, I'm assuming your avoiding the argument instead of debating it!

 

[ÃÂoppleganger]

http://members.cox.net/survivorconnecti ... tats1.html

Since 1993, Survivor Connections has tracked rape, incest, sexual assault, and child molestation reports from survivors - or from their supportive, non-offender parents or other relatives.

The statistics below are derived from only those people who chose to identify themselves to us. The privacy and right to confidentiality of all callers and correspondents are strictly maintained.

The figures point out the variety of occupations of sexual predators in positions of trust and power.

Clergy -non-RC priests 217

Date rapist* 4

Doctors, medical 48

Foster home/orphanage* 9

Incest 704

Law enforcement 15

Neighbors/family friends 199

Older child* 4

Priests, RC 994 ( Nearly 1000 priests! )

Ritual abuse 136

Strangers 22

Teachers 79

Therapist/counselors 77

Youth leaders 72

Unknown, other type perp 364

* denotes a newer category.

Contact has mostly come to us from all 50 of the USA states, but also from survivors from Australia, Canada, Finland, France, India, Israel, New Zealand, South Africa, Trinidad, and the United Kingdom.

The statistics above are incomplete. They reflect data through December 1997.

Some survivors report sexual abuse by more than one type of perpetrator.
Some choose not to disclose anything at all about their abuser.
Other survivors remain anonymous.

You are no longer alone.
Survivor Connections, Inc.
The True Memory Foundation®
52 Lyndon Rd.
Cranston, RI 02905-1121
United States of America

You statistics are wrong, and your Biased, Plus the should be accountable to a higher standard!

 

[ÃÂoppleganger]

http://www.familyresearchinst.org/FRR_03_04.html

Religious Leaders
Religious leaders were grouped into Roman Catholic priests, non-Catholic Christian clergy, and non-Christian clergy. There were 116 Catholic perpetrators: 95 who engaged in homosexuality and who violated 229 children; 17 who engaged in heterosexuality and who raped 24 girls; and 4 who engaged in sex with at least 4 children of unspecified sex.

There were 61 non-Catholic Christian clergy who molested the underage. Those who engaged in homosexuality included four clergywomen (Church of Christ, Protestant, 2 Pentecostals) and 35 clergymen (one each from 7th Day Adventist, Salvation Army, Evangelical Free, and Greek Orthodox; and 9 Protestants, 8 Pentecostals, 2 Lutherans, 4 Episcopalians, 2 Methodists, and 6 Baptists). These 39 ‘homosexuals’ raped 229 children. Twenty one ‘heterosexual’ clergymen raped 31 girls (2 Seventh Day Adventists, 2 Church of Christ, 8 Protestants, 6 Pentecostals, and 3 Baptists). One additional Episcopal clergyman raped a child of unspecified sex.

In addition, 4 Rabbis homosexually raped 10 children, 2 Rabbis heterosexually raped 2 girls, a Mormon pastor who engaged in homosexuality violated 3 boys, 3 Mormons heterosexually raped 10 girls, and a (male) Buddhist monk raped a boy.

Overall in this set, clergywomen accounted for 6.7% of non-Catholic Christian clergy molesters, but 10.3% of homosexual molesters suggesting that clergywomen may be disproportionately homosexual.

http://www.remnantofgod.org/nl0404.htm
This shows how disproprotional your stats are!

If anyone knows of a good site that has credible government statistics please add a link!

 

[Sinias]

"Marian teachings received considerable impetus at the councils of Ephesus (431) and Chalcedon (451), both of which upheld the title theotokos ("God-bearer," or Mother of God) as descriptive of Mary. The doctrine of Mary's bodily assumption into heaven can be traced to apocryphal documents dating from the 4th century, but this doctrine was not officially formulated and defined for Roman Catholics until 1950 (see Assumption of Mary). The doctrine of Mary's Immaculate Conception was a matter of dispute throughout the Middle Ages. In 1854, however, Pope Pius IX declared that Mary was freed from original sin by a special act of grace the moment she was conceived in the womb of Saint Anne. (Tradition names Saint Anne and Saint Joachim as Mary's parents.)"

So from reading this, if it is fact, the Catholic Church changed the status of Mary throughout the course of its growth. If this statement is incorrect please let me know. Also someone stated that Catholic tradition has been around for 1500 years or so. What did the people believe the 500 years before that? Did the Catholics just up and change things when a new pope came around? Seems to me that the Catholic Church changed a lot of beliefs during its reign and different Pope's had different ideas and thoughts about what was fact or fiction.

 

[francisdesales]

So from reading this, if it is fact, the Catholic Church changed the status of Mary throughout the course of its growth. If this statement is incorrect please let me know. Also someone stated that Catholic tradition has been around for 1500 years or so. What did the people believe the 500 years before that? Did the Catholics just up and change things when a new pope came around? Seems to me that the Catholic Church changed a lot of beliefs during its reign and different Pope's had different ideas and thoughts about what was fact or fiction.

Think of the Church as how Christ described it - a mustard seed. The mustard seed looks different at maturity then it does as a sprout. It is the exact same thing, however.

The Church has been given a body of teachings, some oral, some written. The Church has taken this revelation from God and "pondered it in her heart" as Mary has done. As time moved forward, the Church grew in understanding of God's revelation. Later generations built upon this understanding of His revelation. It is the same Church as 33 AD, but it has developed, taking into account a fuller understanding of God's revelation AND its place in the world around it.

Regards

 

[ÃÂoppleganger]

The Church has taken this revelation from God and "pondered it in her heart" as Mary has done. As time moved forward, the Church grew in understanding of God's revelation. Later generations built upon this understanding of His revelation. It is the same Church as 33 AD, but it has developed, taking into account a fuller understanding of God's revelation AND its place in the world around it.

What a bunch of nonsense, if you really believe that this is how the Church developed, you couldn't be more wrong!

 

[francisdesales]

What a bunch of nonsense, if you really believe that this is how the Church developed, you couldn't be more wrong!

I think you'll have to do better than that...

 

[ÃÂoppleganger]

Why? its true!

 

[francisdesales]

Why? its true!

Are you going to offer some proof or are we just expected to believe you based on your "it's true!" comment?

I dont' consider you infallible, thus, the necessity of proving your statement.

 

[ÃÂoppleganger]

Well if you consider anyone not to be fallible your wrong!

 

[Solo]

Well if you consider anyone not to be fallible your wrong!

Are you telling me that Fran is fallible? :o

I thought that their were three of us. I guess it is just me and the pope, now! 8-)

Well, at least me! :angel:

Okay! Just Jesus Christ is the only one born of a woman that is infallible!!

 

[francisdesales]

Are you telling me that Fran is fallible? :o

I thought that their were three of us. I guess it is just me and the pope, now! 8-)

Well, at least me! :angel:

Okay! Just Jesus Christ is the only one born of a woman that is infallible!!

I'll give you credit, you can be funny sometimes. :

Regards

 

[ÃÂoppleganger]

Well give me absolution SOLO! LOL :angel:

 

[waitinontheLamb]

it means only that some action did not happen up to a certain point; it does not imply that the action did happen later, which is the modern sense of the term. in fact, if the modern sense is forced on the bible some ridiculous meanings result.

"Michal the daughter of Saul had no children till the day of her death" (2 Sam. 6:23). i guess she had children after she was dead?

Deut. 34:6 And he buried him in a valley in the land of Moab, over against Bethpeor: but no man knoweth of his sepulchre unto this day.
But no one has known since that day either.

What a silly statement. This reminds me of mormonism and the ways you have to twist and dance around God's Word to make it work out the way your religion teaches. The Bible is clear that Mary had other children. You can mistreat the Word of God to support some silly notion that you have to believe to be catholic but it won't help you in the day of judgment.

 

[francisdesales]

What a silly statement. This reminds me of mormonism and the ways you have to twist and dance around God's Word to make it work out the way your religion teaches. The Bible is clear that Mary had other children. You can mistreat the Word of God to support some silly notion that you have to believe to be catholic but it won't help you in the day of judgment.

We have recently had this conversation already. The Bible NOWHERE says that Mary had other biological children. That is Protestant presumption reading their religion into the bible, as you say.

The most a person who TRULY follows the Scriptures and disagrees with the Catholic point of view is to say "I disagree, we just do not KNOW if Mary was a virgin or not" and leave it at that.

Regards

 

[Guest]

We have recently had this conversation already. The Bible NOWHERE says that Mary had other biological children. That is Protestant presumption reading their religion into the bible, as you say.

The most a person who TRULY follows the Scriptures and disagrees with the Catholic point of view is to say "I disagree, we just do not KNOW if Mary was a virgin or not" and leave it at that.

Regards

francis - let's be honest yourself, the Bible clearly states that there are Brothers and Sisters, and the only woman mentioned is Mary - there is NO evidence that Joseph was married prior or that they had themselves had brothers or sisters that had children to produce cousins outside of Elizabeth who had John.

also, clear reading of the Scripture is that Jopesh kept Mary a virgin until the birth of Jesus.

 

[francisdesales]

francis - let's be honest yourself, the Bible clearly states that there are Brothers and Sisters, and the only woman mentioned is Mary - there is NO evidence that Joseph was married prior or that they had themselves had brothers or sisters that had children to produce cousins outside of Elizabeth who had John.

also, clear reading of the Scripture is that Jopesh kept Mary a virgin until the birth of Jesus.

We have extra-biblical writings that relate that Joseph had children from a past marriage. The Bible does NOT tell us that Mary was the mother of those children. The Bible says ONLY JESUS was the son of Mary. The others are called the brothers of Jesus, not the children of Mary. Big difference.

Regards

 

[Guest]

We have extra-biblical writings that relate that Joseph had children from a past marriage. The Bible does NOT tell us that Mary was the mother of those children. The Bible says ONLY JESUS was the son of Mary. The others are called the brothers of Jesus, not the children of Mary. Big difference.

Regards

and what are these 'extra-biblical' writings?

 

[jgredline]

We have extra-biblical writings that relate that Joseph had children from a past marriage. The Bible does NOT tell us that Mary was the mother of those children. The Bible says ONLY JESUS was the son of Mary. The others are called the brothers of Jesus, not the children of Mary. Big difference.

Regards

This is pure and utter nonsense...

 

[francisdesales]

This is pure and utter nonsense...

What is? That you make the presumption that Mary gave birth to other children based on "the brothers of Jesus"?

I'd agree, it is nonsense.

Regards