PDA

View Full Version : Canon Law


SteelCityMom
09-29-2010, 04:51 PM
Ok, so we have the tread about Muslims and Sharia law...and I'm posting this here so I don't hijack that thread with this discussion that I feel is as important when discussing how religion changes a nations politics and its people. If we are going to discuss the disturbing trends of Sharia, we must also examine those of Canon Law and the Roman Catholic Church.

We all know the bloody history of the Catholic Church, we know about the ongoing investigations of child molestation, but not many people care to look into Canon Law and how it affects (and has affected) the people within the Church, and nations laws...including our own. Here's an overview of some disturbing trends within Canon Law and the Concordats who enforce them. Each is an article that can be viewed here...http://www.concordatwatch.eu/showsite.php?org_id=871

Concordat Strategy
For over 900 years concordats have been central to the Vatican's attempt to wrest power from the state. After the pope failed to get William the Conqueror to swear fealty to him, and his legate failed in his bid to rule the country and got chased out of England, in 1107 the pope finally managed to get the Henry I to sign the first concordat. These agreements with the Vatican, giving it political and financial privileges, have now been concluded with dozens of countries, with more appearing every year.

What are Concordats?
These church-state accords generally give the Church massive state subsidies and other privileges. They also permit Church employees to be hounded about their private lives. Yet as “international treaties”, concordats bypass the democratic process, making parliaments powerless to modify, let alone revoke them.

The Vatican’s triple crown: church, government and state
“The Vatican is inserted into the international community because it is a state; once there, it behaves like a church.”[1] By setting up three legal identities and then adroitly switching from one to another, the Vatican has obtained unprecedented legal rights and international influence. This article has been translated into Portuguese.

Vatican smokescreen on human rights
The Vatican tries to quietly elevate Chuch doctrine above human rights. It has not signed some human rights treaties and in some others has made “reservations” which keep it from having to comply. This strategy gives the Church leverage, prevents it from being held accountable for priestly abuse, and protects its courts from charges that they violate the right to a fair trial.

Concordats promote authoritarianism
Authoritarianism concentrates power in one man or group. It tends not to remain at the top, but to pervade society at all levels. Blind obedience comes to be seen as the necessary glue for keeping society together, and it is applauded by the mini-dictators throughout such a society. However, as recent research shows, a lack of power is deeply damaging to the individual.

The left gets a modus vivendi, the right a concordat
Concordats have traditionally been made with rightwing governments, whether absolute monarchies or fascist dictatorships. However, only a quiet working arrangement has been made with authoritarian governments on the left, as these compete with the Church ideologically, rather than complementing it.

Concordats help control women
Concordats can be a powerful tool for social control. These Vatican “treaties” can prohibit divorce, get a woman fired for remarrying or even deny her access to sex education and family planning. Concordats help keep women married and bearing children for the Church. Yet studies have shown that most Catholics worldwide disagree with many key Vatican doctrines — as do many priests.

Ten quotes on concordats
Quotes from popes, prelates and critics give a lively look at Vatican concordats from many points of view.

Concordat agenda, 1075: the “Papal dictation”
This internal Vatican memo was dictated by Gregory VII near the beginning of his papacy. It sets an agenda for increasing papal power, and underlies the pope's demand that William the Conqueror pay him fealty. The English king's refusal helped shift the power struggle from outright Vatican sovereignty of Christian nations to Vatican control over their bishops, (the “investiture controversy”), and led to the earliest concordats.

Perspectives: The Second Coming of papal politics
Christoph Prantner of Der Standard offers this view from Austria, which has long experience of Church involvement in politics. The debate about Islam, he says, is also reviving political Catholicism. In Madrid, Paris and Rome the boundaries between church and state are becoming blurred, raising the danger of a return to theological politics.

Canon Law
This Canon (or Church) Law is the Christian counterpart to (Jewish) Halakha, Hindu Law and Sharia. Concordats enable thr Roman Catholic version of Canon Law to influence the lives of Church employees and those who must rely on Church-administered social service agencies....

Canon Law can trump clerics' civil rights
A Swiss priest was forbidden to research or publish anything about Opus Dei until its founder was safely canonised. A Polish priest was banned from investigating or writing anything about clerical complicity with the Communist Secret Service. And countless others who never make it into the newspapers suffer the same fate. For they are bound by Canon Law, the Church regulations whose jurisdiction is guaranteed by many concordats.

ricardisimo
09-29-2010, 06:54 PM
Thank you. I'm going to let others post before I vomit up all of my usual anti-religious bile. This thread is very much appreciated. Intellectual consistency... what a novel idea!

MasterOfPuppets
09-29-2010, 08:24 PM
Thank you. I'm going to let others post before I vomit up all of my usual anti-religious bile. This thread is very much appreciated. Intellectual consistency... what a novel idea!
http://bbs.mediumpimpin.com/images/smilies/rant.gifGTFO of my country !!!

SteelersinCA
09-30-2010, 02:48 AM
Awww now Zu is gonna be pissed off when he wakes up in the morning.

zulater
09-30-2010, 09:08 PM
Wow the Catholic threat really concerns me now!

Well if I were a 12 year old alter boy it might, but A. I'm not 12, B, I've never beern Catholic, C I really see no relevant threat to the citizens of this country from the Catholic Church.

How many Islamic attacks on these shores have been thwarted since 9-11? How much carnage would those attacks have caused if carried out?

Sorry but the equivilence that's been inferred really isn't.

But thanks I'll keep my eyes open for those sneaky Catholics all the same.

zulater
09-30-2010, 09:13 PM
Awww now Zu is gonna be pissed off when he wakes up in the morning.

Why? You think the Catholic church might be planning on a teror attack in the New York Subway? Maybe some disgruntled Priests gonna take down the Sears tower?

Breaking news the Catholic church is power mad and money hungry! Shocking! Now tell me something i haven't known since I was about 10. :coffee:

SteelCityMom
09-30-2010, 09:36 PM
Why? You think the Catholic church might be planning on a teror attack in the New York Subway? Maybe some disgruntled Priests gonna take down the Sears tower?

Breaking news the Catholic church is power mad and money hungry! Shocking! Now tell me something i haven't known since I was about 10. :coffee:

They let their priests touch little boys and do nothing about it? They don't allow women to get a divorce even if their husband beats and rapes them (excommunication)? Refusing to help the needy in states and countries that allow gay marriage? It's involvement with Hitler?

I could go on if you wish. I hate extremist Muslims, but at least they're not wolves in sheep clothes ya know. The Catholic Church (IMO) is just as evil, they just do a better job of hiding it.

MasterOfPuppets
09-30-2010, 09:59 PM
some people consider the IRA catholic terrorist ...:noidea:

Zero Tolerance at Ground Zero

The terrorist history of a Catholic priest in Northern Ireland—and the reaction of his victims—ought to serve as a lesson about how to overcome bigotry.

I was just beginning to think that this long summer of intolerance was coming to an end. American hysteria about the non-mosque (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/organizations/p/park51/index.html?scp=1-spot&sq=ground%20zero%20mosque&st=cse) that’s not at Ground Zero (http://www.newsweek.com/blogs/the-gaggle/2010/08/18/the-mosque-that-is-nowhere-near-ground-zero.html) seems to be subsiding just a bit. The French government might be backing away from its ginned-up xenophobia (http://www.newsweek.com/2010/08/17/nicolas-sarkozy-is-courting-right-wing-extremists.html) amid reports the prime minister isn’t really on board with the president’s right-wing rhetoric. There’s even a chance that peace talks between Israelis and Palestinians will get back on track at a summit in Washington next week. Whew. Then I picked up a copy of this morning’s London Times and discovered a whole new reason for some people with old wounds to start hating each other anew.
Splashed across two pages is the story of a Roman Catholic priest who appears to have participated in car bombings that slaughtered nine people (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-11061296), Protestants and Catholics alike, in the little village of Claudy in Northern Ireland back in 1972. Among the dead were a mother of eight, two teenagers, and a little girl. Police investigators concluded that the late Father James Chesney had a role in the act, and he may even have ordered it.


In the aftermath, church officials allegedly helped protect Chesney from prosecution—and colluded with British officials in the process. Their ostensible motivation was concern that public knowledge of a priest’s involvement would have made that bloodiest year of the sectarian Troubles in Northern Ireland even bloodier. So the church hierarchy, typically, thought the best approach was to move him to another parish, out of the way and out of the reach of the law. Chesney died in Ireland of natural causes in 1980. In 2002, after the 30th anniversary of the attack, the case was reopened. But there has never been a conviction.



The basic account of these events and conspiracies is drawn from a detailed report (http://nw-assets.s3.amazonaws.com/pdf/Hutchinson_report.pdf) published this week by the police ombudsman of Northern Ireland, Al Hutchinson. This is not rumor. It is the result of extensive government investigations, and the case it makes against Father Chesney and those who covered for him is, to say the least, damning.


So should we now think twice or three times about letting anybody build a Catholic place of worship or community center in our town? After all, if some priests are terrorists (not to mention pedophiles), aren’t all Catholics suspect?


Video muted: click volume for sound ‘A Little Intolerant, But Good Reason To Be’ Protesters for and against the building of a Muslim community center near Ground Zero talk about their reasons for supporting or opposing the project.

Of course not. But you get the point: it is the height of folly—and prejudice—to make a whole group of believers face angry abuse and protests because of the actions of a minuscule number of extremists and criminals. For many centuries, some Catholics and some Protestants, and some Jews and some Muslims, have been responsible for carrying out atrocities, convinced that they had a God-given right to murder anyone who got in their way. That should never be an excuse to condemn them all, even if some people see the terrorists as freedom fighters.


continued

http://www.newsweek.com/2010/08/25/what-an-irish-terrorist-teaches-us-about-tolerance.html

zulater
09-30-2010, 10:01 PM
They let their priests touch little boys and do nothing about it?

They don't let them, they certainly don't encourage them, they just don't do enough to stop them or punish then afterwards.
The stupidiest thing the Catholic church ever did was to prevent their clergy from marrying. It's an unnatural state for a man to live celibate, and when you only recruit men who don't take woman you're just asking for trouble.


They don't allow women to get a divorce even if their husband beats and rapes them (excommunication)?

Funny I know plenty of divorced Catholic woman and I don't know of one that was ever excommunicated. In fact I have several divorced Catholic relatives that are still very active in their church.

I agree the Church's stance on divorce is archaic and stupid, but I don't think it's enforced to the degree it once was. and of course if you're rich enough you can always buy an annulment from the church, the Kennedy's have ben doing it for years. :chuckle:



Refusing to help the needy in states and countries that allow gay marriage? It's involvement with Hitler?

Still the Hitler thing? We're talking 60 years ago with the Hitler already.

I could go on if you wish. I hate extremist Muslims, but at least they're not wolves in sheep clothes ya know. The Catholic Church (IMO) is just as evil, they just do a better job of hiding it.

Yes there's some evil cretins in the Catholic Church no doubt, Vatican City is a particuliar cesspool. But refusing to help needy states that go against Church doctrine isn't the same as forced conversion at the hand of the knife. Honor killings, stoning adulterers and gays etc...

SteelCityMom
09-30-2010, 10:27 PM
:sofunny: I love how funding and supporting Hitler 60 years ago isn't a valid argument anymore. That's classic.

How about the fact that they not only hide their kiddie touching priests from law enforcement by moving them around, but they also have refused to sign a number of human rights bills? Or that they have kept Africa poor and AIDS ridden? Cause you really do have to keep in mind when discussing the Catholic Church issue, that we're not just talking about the Church in the US, we're talking worldwide. You like to reference things that Islam does worldwide, but only apply things like the Church not allowing divorce to US only. The Catholic Church is not predominant in the US lol.

Don't do enough to stop their priests from molesting children...LMFAO. Seriously. Go read a few articles on it, the Church has PAID OFF FAMILIES to keep them quiet about it.

The Vatican tries to quietly elevate Chuch doctrine above human rights. It has not signed some human rights treaties and in some others has made “reservations” which keep it from having to comply. This strategy gives the Church leverage, prevents it from being held accountable for priestly abuse, and protects its courts from charges that they violate the right to a fair trial.
“Human rights language is being co-opted by those with an anti-human rights agenda, among governments but also armed groups and even within civil society.” — Claudio Cordone, Secretary General, Amnesty International, 2010 [1]


♦ Vatican attack on human rights dressed up as need to counterbalance rights with duties

To undercut human rights without engaging in a potentially damaging frontal attack, the Vatican attempts to turn back the clock. It tries to return to the Middle Ages before the advent of human rights when Church taught that people had duties, but no unconditonal rights. Humans were owned by God and had duties to their Creator. This kept people humble: the idea of human rights didn't yet exist.

In his Caritas in Veritate Benedict XVI cautions against “alleged rights, arbitrary and non-essential in nature”. [2] The rationale is that human rights are arbitrary because they don't come from God, whose spokesman happens to be the pope. And Benedict goes on to say that duties are needed to “set a limit on rights”. This enables him, in a roundabout way, to attack the basic idea of human rights, which is that they're unconditional. His assault becomes even more indirect when he tries to replace “human rights” with something called “natural rights”. These are held to derive from something else called “natural law” which just happens to conform to Church doctrine. This can be managed because “natural law is abstract and vague to the point of making its application to concrete cases extremely difficult. It requires an authoritative interpreter, the Church.” [3]

Pope is using the smokescreen of theology to mask his attack on human rights. People get lost in this maze of theological justifications, concentrating on them, rather than on the fact that they're simply designed to reach the conclusion the Vatican wants: that Church doctrine, not human rights is the final arbiter — for everyone.

Read more here...http://www.concordatwatch.eu/showtopic.php?org_id=871&kb_header_id=40301

Again, the Catholic church is JUST as evil and dangerous as extremist Islam. They just terrorize people in different ways.

SteelCityMom
09-30-2010, 10:29 PM
● “Concordat marriage”, where it can be enforced, removes the right to a civil divorce. Those who want to get married in a Catholic church — or whose grandmothers insist on it — are bound for life. They legally renounce their right to ever sue for divorce. This is already the situation in both the Dominican Republic and Malta, and the Vatican is trying to get it introduced into Poland, as well. The Polish concordat, with its restrictive marriage clause, is already in place and the Vatican is presently waiting for the politicians to legally cut off access to civil divorce for Catholics and force them into “concordat marriages”.

● Concordats can also help the Church control women through their jobs. That's because concordats always state that Canon Law, the Church law that forbids divorce, governs “Church institutions”. This sounds harmless, but it's not. For the Church uses money from the taxpayer to run social services, to the extent that in placed like Germany the churches are the country's major employer. This can get women in Church-run (but publically subsidised) institutions fired for remarrying.
● “Conscience concordats” (or equivalent “conscience clauses” in other concordats) limit women's reproductive choice. These put what the Church calls “Catholic conscience” ahead of other human rights. However, studies have repeatedly shown that the actual conscience of most Catholics worldwide differs significantly from the edicts of the hierarchy. (See, for example, New Poll Shows Catholics around the World Believe Good Catholics Can Use Condoms.) And an undercover investigation by an Italian magazine, where reporters pretended to confess various "sins", showed that the priests also lacked what the Vatican calls “Catholic conscience”. (See Survey exposes divide between Pope and priests.)

Yet the Vatican tried to get Slovakia to ratify a “conscience concordat” quickly and quietly before it entered the European Union. When this didn't go through as fast as planned, the EU human rights lawyers issued a damning report on the draft concordat and the Slovak government fell soon afterwards. See EU lawyers warn: Concordats endanger human rights.

http://www.concordatwatch.eu/showtopic.php?org_id=871&kb_header_id=31651

MasterOfPuppets
09-30-2010, 10:42 PM
Yes there's some evil cretins in the Catholic Church no doubt, Vatican City is a particuliar cesspool. But refusing to help needy states that go against Church doctrine isn't the same as forced conversion at the hand of the knife. Honor killings, stoning adulterers and gays etc...
what category would abortion clinic bombings fall under ?

zulater
09-30-2010, 10:45 PM
love how funding and supporting Hitler 60 years ago isn't a valid argument anymore. That's classic.

It's history, sad as it might have been it's not relevant to what's happening today.

How about the fact that they not only hide their kiddie touching priests from law enforcement by moving them around, but they also have refused to sign a number of human rights bills?

I condemn the Church for every instance of cover up.

Or that they have kept Africa poor and AIDS ridden?

Yeah of course we know the Muslims have done everything in their power to see to their relief?


Cause you really do have to keep in mind when discussing the Catholic Church issue, that we're not just talking about the Church in the US, we're talking worldwide. You like to reference things that Islam does worldwide, but only apply things like the Church not allowing divorce to US only. The Catholic Church is not predominant in the US lol.

So, not allowing divorce is the same as female mutilation, honor killings, forced marriage ( at least the Mick's let you pick your partner. lol) not allowing woman to own land, testify to her own rape etc...?

Don't do enough to stop their priests from molesting children...LMFAO. Seriously. Go read a few articles on it, the Church has PAID OFF FAMILIES to keep them quiet about it.

Oh I'm familiar enough with it. I know it sucks, I don't defend the Catholic church in any way on these matters. Again I'm not catholic, never have been. My Grandmother ( fathers side) was, but hated the nuns from her school days so much that she left the church as soon as she came of age to do so.

And you know what, for that she wasn't threatened or arrested or coerced in any way to return to the church. You see the difference I'm driving at here? :coffee:

SteelCityMom
09-30-2010, 10:46 PM
what category would abortion clinic bombings fall under ?

Oh, they're just wackjobs who obviously have no connections to any churches whatsoever. They are not true Christians because they don't follow Jesus' path the right way. :noidea:

That's the only argument I've heard against Christian/Catholic terrorists. Even though they say they are doing these things in the name of God, they can't possibly be doing it in the name of God because God would never permit that...or something along those lines. Never made sense to me.

zulater
09-30-2010, 10:52 PM
what category would abortion clinic bombings fall under ?

Nuts, criminals, socialy deranged misfits, you choose? :noidea:

btw I'm pro choice, but find abortion distastefull.A sad reality that wont go away by sweeping it under the carpet by force of legislation.


You guys have me pigeonholed as some right wing looney, sorry to dissapoint but on most social issues I'm fairly liberal. :flap:

SteelCityMom
09-30-2010, 10:52 PM
It's history, sad as it might have been it's not relevant to what's happening today.

Yes, but it's not ancient history. People who suffered are still alive and the Church has never even received a slap on the wrist of its involvement. A little suspicious don't you think?

I condemn the Church for every instance of cover up.

That's great that you condemn it. Meanwhile, the Church still allows it to go on unchecked.

Or that they have kept Africa poor and AIDS ridden?

Yeah of course we know the Muslims have done everything in their power to see to their relief?

Nice deflection. We're not talking about Muslims here, we're talking about the Catholic Church and how it has pretty much oppressed an entire continent through its medieval moralistic laws.


So, not allowing divorce is the same as female mutilation, honor killings, forced marriage ( at least the Mick's let you pick your partner. lol) not allowing woman to own land, testify to her own rape etc...?

What part of not allowing a woman to divorce even if she is being beaten and raped do you not understand?

Oh I'm familiar enough with it. I know it sucks, I don't defend the Catholic church in any way on these matters. Again I'm not catholic, never have been. My Grandmother ( fathers side) was, but hated the nuns from her school days so much that she left the church as soon as she came of age to do so.

And you know what, for that she wasn't threatened or arrested or coerced in any way to return to the church. You see the difference I'm driving at here? :coffee:

The same is true in most Muslim majority countries as well. :noidea: You enjoy that coffee while the Church is plotting how next to fund an evil bastard like Hitler to meet their own agenda.

I'm not trying to turn this into an Islam vs. Catholic debate. I know radical Islam is more in your face and violently dangerous (at the moment) than Catholicism. Catholicism (right now) controls its population in a more subversive way. It has to at this point in history. But their intentions are every bit as evil as what radical Islams intentions are. I have no doubts about that.

zulater
09-30-2010, 10:57 PM
Oh, they're just wackjobs who obviously have no connections to any churches whatsoever. They are not true Christians because they don't follow Jesus' path the right way. :noidea:

That's the only argument I've heard against Christian/Catholic terrorists. Even though they say they are doing these things in the name of God, they can't possibly be doing it in the name of God because God would never permit that...or something along those lines. Never made sense to me.

As I've told you before I'm agnostic. But I will say this, by example I think it's fair to say that Jesus, the man that really existed, wouldn't have bombed abortion clinics. From my understanding of the man's life he was passive aggesive in his teachings and his actions, i.e. "turn the other cheek" , "render unto Ceaser..." , "he without sin cast the first stone" etc...

I think Martin Luther King was a perfect example of how someone uses the teachings of Jesus to bring about positive social reform without violence.

SteelCityMom
09-30-2010, 11:01 PM
Nuts, criminals, socialy deranged misfits, you choose? :noidea:

btw I'm pro choice, but find abortion distastefull.A sad reality that wont go away by sweeping it under the carpet by force of legislation.


You guys have me pigeonholed as some right wing looney, sorry to dissapoint but on most social issues I'm fairly liberal. :flap:

Not trying to pigeon hole you. I started this thread because it seems many just want to jump the bandwagon and slam Islam as a whole for what a small percentage of radicals do....but nobody wants to face up to what the Catholic Church is doing right in front of peoples faces and some behind their backs.

I'm also willing to wager that the Catholic Church is just jizzing itself right now over every radical Islamist act. It means they can get away with that much more and fewer people will notice. It also wouldn't surprise me in the least to find out that the Catholic Church had/has a hand in funding terrorism. They're freaking sneaky little bastards like that sometimes.

SteelCityMom
09-30-2010, 11:03 PM
As I've told you before I'm agnostic. But I will say this, by example I think it's fair to say that Jesus, the man that really existed, wouldn't have bombed abortion clinics. From my understanding of the man's life he was passive aggesive in his teachings and his actions, i.e. "turn the other cheek" , "render unto Ceaser..." , "he without sin cast the first stone" etc...

I think Martin Luther King was a perfect example of how someone uses the teachings of Jesus to bring about positive social reform without violence.

That's great...and I tend to agree with you. But saying that people who commit heinous acts, and admit that they are doing it in the name of God, doesn't mean that they are "just wackjobs" and that radical Islamists are "religious terrorists". You can't have it both ways.

And before you go copying and pasting quotes from the Qu'ran advocating violence...just remember that I can do the same with the Bible. Both are taken out of context.

zulater
09-30-2010, 11:05 PM
I'm not trying to turn this into an Islam vs. Catholic debate. I know radical Islam is more in your face and violently dangerous (at the moment) than Catholicism. Catholicism (right now) controls its population in a more subversive way. It has to at this point in history. But their intentions are every bit as evil as what radical Islams intentions are. I have no doubts about that.

Power and money corrupts all institutions, but i really don't see the Catholic church as overtly evil. Withholding isn't the same as attacking.The church has been out of the business of forced conversions for centuries, you want to divorce, leave the damn church, they really aren't going to track you down and kill you if you do.

zulater
09-30-2010, 11:11 PM
That's great...and I tend to agree with you. But saying that people who commit heinous acts, and admit that they are doing it in the name of God, doesn't mean that they are "just wackjobs" and that radical Islamists are "religious terrorists". You can't have it both ways.

And before you go copying and pasting quotes from the Qu'ran advocating violence...just remember that I can do the same with the Bible. Both are taken out of context.

Actually where I could go if I wanted to is to compare the life and teachings of Jesus to those of Muhamad.

short version

Jesus was forcefull but gentle as a man. to the best of my knowledge he never killed anyone. So in my opinion those that commit violence in the name of Jesus are betraying his ways.

Conversly Muhamed was a brutal person in the flesh. It's easy to see how those that follow him would be incited to violence.

MasterOfPuppets
09-30-2010, 11:19 PM
Actually where I could go if I wanted to is to compare the life and teachings of Jesus to those of Muhamad.

short version

Jesus was forcefull but gentle as a man. to the best of my knowledge he never killed anyone. So in my opinion those that commit violence in the name of Jesus are betraying his ways.

Conversly Muhamed was a brutal person in the flesh. It's easy to see how those that follow him would be incited to violence.
not to mention he was a pedophile ...

SteelCityMom
09-30-2010, 11:22 PM
Power and money corrupts all institutions, but i really don't see the Catholic church as overtly evil. Withholding isn't the same as attacking.The church has been out of the business of forced conversions for centuries, you want to divorce, leave the damn church, they really aren't go to kill you if you do.

Yeah, they're just peachy keen. Sitting back, with all their money and power, and letting others do the killing for them (sometimes).

Here's some good articles you should check out. None of this is ancient history either.

Rwandan priest goes on trial for genocide

Rory Carrol, Africa correspondent
The Guardian, Tuesday 21 September 2004 12.04 BST
Article history
A decade after allegedly bulldozing his church to crush parishioners cowering inside, a Rwandan priest went on trial for genocide yesterday at the United Nations war crimes tribunal in Arusha, Tanzania.
Athanase Seromba is accused of helping Hutu extremists to herd 2,000 Tutsis into the Roman Catholic church in Nyange, Rwanda, before demolishing the walls and roof. Survivors were stabbed, clubbed or shot.

Father Seromba, 41, is charged with genocide, complicity in genocide, conspiracy to commit genocide and crimes against humanity. The first Roman Catholic priest to appear at the tribunal, he faces life in prison if convicted.

more here...http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2004/sep/21/rwanda.unitednations

Canada Apologizes To Indigenous
The government of Canada issued an official apology to its 810,000 indigenous peoples on January 6 in a statement read on Parliament Hill in Ottawa.
It specifically apologized for more than 80 of the church-run, government-funded schools operated for nearly a century, beginning in the 1880's. Investigations have revealed numerous incidents of rapes, beatings, suicides, suspicious deaths and humiliating punishments.

"To those individuals who experienced the tragedy of sexual and physical abuse . . . and who have carried this burden believing that in some way they must be responsible, we wish to emphasize that what you experienced was not your fault and should never have happened," said Indian Affairs minister Jane Stewart.
She pledged $245 million for counseling and treatment programs for victims of abuse at religious schools.

http://freetruth.50webs.org/D3.htm

The Vietnam War was declared as a crusade by the American bishops. Those same bishops also declared, in the second Vaticanum, that one should use the atomic bomb(!) against Vietnam to defend the Catholism there (Deschner 1986).
-- Kriminalgeschichte des Christentums - Band 1. Die Frühzeit, by Karlheinz Deschner ("The criminal history of Christianity - Volume 1. The early times")
Link
In the case of Vietnam, the role played by the Catholic Church has been paramount. The Pope ... [consecrated] the WHOLE of Vietnam — that is the North and the South to the Virgin Mary.
-- Chapter 23 of The Vatican's Holocaust by Avro Manhattan
This was done by conveniently ignoring the fact that Vietnam was by far a Buddhist country.
In the case of Vietnam a couple of centuries ago, closely knit Catholic groups cemented themselves into the surrounding non-Christian Buddhist environment. Once well established they assert themselves over their Buddhist neighbors as independent economic and political factions.
Their assertions required not only bold, religious self confidence, but also the imposition of Catholic authority upon their Buddhist co-religionists. Such imposition led to punitive legislation, which, when resisted brought repression, leading in time to the use of brute force.

In the case of President Diem and his Catholic junta [in the mid 20th century] they established themselves and their authority first with gradual legal discrimination against the Buddhist majority. The unrestricted use of terror followed when the Buddhist population refused to submit. Diem's approach was not just a freak example of contemporary Catholic aggressiveness in a largely non-Christian society. It has been repeated on the Asian continent for three hundred years.
-- Chapter 17 of Vietnam: Why did we go? by Avro Manhattan

http://freetruth.50webs.org/D3.htm

During colonization Aborigines were hunted, killed and driven from their lands by European settlers.

As recently as the 1970s officials were still taking Aborigine children from their families and placing them in orphanages, often run by churches, in a now discredited assimilation program.

The tens of thousands of people affected have become known as the "stolen generations."

While all six of Australia's state governments have formally apologized to Aborigines, Prime Minister John Howard refuses, arguing modern Australians should not say sorry for actions they did not personally commit.

http://archives.cnn.com/2001/WORLD/asiapcf/auspac/11/22/australia.aborigine/index.html

Sounds like a bunch of Catholics just walking in Jesus' shoes huh? This is all quite uniform with the history of the Catholic Church by the way.

zulater
09-30-2010, 11:32 PM
Don't confuse me with a Catholic apologist. Both sides of my family in a way defected from that church, my mother is English, as born on the Island English. And of course Old Henry got pissed when he wasn't allowed to divorce his wives and started his own church.:chuckle:

And of course i already explained a little about how much my maternal grandmother came to hate the church.

So don't expect me to be their advocate. I really don't feel too impassioned to take their part if you get my drift. :hatsoff:

zulater
09-30-2010, 11:34 PM
okd3hLlvvLw


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=okd3hLlvvLw&feature=player_embedded
Let's leave it here for the night SCM. :drink:

MasterOfPuppets
09-30-2010, 11:43 PM
Don't confuse me with a Catholic apologist. Both sides of my family in a way defected from that church, my mother is English, as born on the Island English. And of course Old Henry got pissed when he wasn't allowed to divorce his wives and started his own church.:chuckle:

And of course i already explained a little about how much my maternal grandmother came to hate the church.

So don't expect me to be their advocate. I really don't feel too impassioned to take their part if you get my drift. :hatsoff:
i think its more of a responce to this...

Yes there's some evil cretins in the Catholic Church no doubt, Vatican City is a particuliar cesspool. But refusing to help needy states that go against Church doctrine isn't the same as forced conversion at the hand of the knife. Honor killings, stoning adulterers and gays etc...

SteelCityMom
09-30-2010, 11:48 PM
Don't confuse me with a Catholic apologist. Both sides of my family in a way defected from that church, my mother is English, as born on the Island English. And of course Old Henry got pissed when he wasn't allowed to divorce his wives and started his own church.:chuckle:

And of course i already explained a little about how much my maternal grandmother came to hate the church.

So don't expect me to be their advocate. I really don't feel too impassioned to take their part if you get my drift. :hatsoff:

I know, I don't. I just don't like it when radical Islam is viewed as the only terroristic form of religion today. Catholic (and other Christian) missionaries are still practicing genocide and terror in nations today, it's just not covered like Muslim terrorism is.

Here's a few sites you can check out when you have the time. They cover present day genocide and cultural extermination by Catholic (and other Christian) missionaries.

http://freetruth.50webs.org/D4a.htm
http://web.archive.org/web/20040122120208/http://www.geocities.com/iconoclastes.geo/mission.html#MT

SteelersinCA
10-01-2010, 11:22 AM
See I told you Zu would be all riled up!

How about this Zu, for all the Catholics trying to distance themselves from the boy touching priests, the abortion bombings, the IRA etc. There are muslims doing the same. Whether you want to see it or not is up to you. You want to make a whole religion about violence based on some passages from their book, have you read the old testament lately??

Really, what's your problem? You start 90 threads about Islam on every board you are on? Does it really bother you that much? Do you constantly look over your shoulder at ever middle eastern person? Nations have long committed atrocities in the name of religion, but because this one is more recent the other ones are somehow not relevant huh?

Give it a rest dude. You hate muslims, we get it.

MasterOfPuppets
10-01-2010, 11:40 AM
i'm not totally disagreeing with zu. europe's growing problems with muslims are well documented. muslims themselves claim they'll be the majority in europe 20 or so years , due to birthrates and immigration. the fact that countries are changing long standing policies and laws to appease them all in the name of political correctness and fear of being labeled racist and xenophobes is enough to cause concern. once they've conquered europe ( majority = winning elections ) its just a matter of time before they set their sites on what will then be the united states of mexico ...because we to suffer from the same PC disease....:popcorn:

zulater
10-01-2010, 02:45 PM
See I told you Zu would be all riled up!

How about this Zu, for all the Catholics trying to distance themselves from the boy touching priests, the abortion bombings, the IRA etc. There are muslims doing the same. Whether you want to see it or not is up to you. You want to make a whole religion about violence based on some passages from their book, have you read the old testament lately??

Really, what's your problem? You start 90 threads about Islam on every board you are on? Does it really bother you that much? Do you constantly look over your shoulder at ever middle eastern person? Nations have long committed atrocities in the name of religion, but because this one is more recent the other ones are somehow not relevant huh?

Give it a rest dude. You hate muslims, we get it.

I don't hate Muslim's, I just don't like their religion very much. That not allowed these days?

btw I'll post what I want, when I want how, I want, so get over yourself Ca.

http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/Pages/Bible-Quran-Violence.htm

Here's today reading assignment see if you can figure out the relevance? .:duh:

SteelCityMom
10-01-2010, 03:07 PM
That's fine, post away...but I started this thread so we could discuss something other than Islamic terrorism. There's already a thread for that.

zulater
10-01-2010, 03:14 PM
That's fine, post away...but I started this thread so we could discuss something other than Islamic terrorism. There's already a thread for that.

It wasn't meant for you SCM. I was personally attacked, so i responded.

SteelCityMom
10-01-2010, 03:40 PM
It wasn't meant for you SCM. I was personally attacked, so i responded.

I get it, and nobody should be attacking anyone else personally for their beliefs...but with any religious debate, it's bound to happen eventually. I understand your position, just wanted to show a different side to all of this crap.

zulater
10-01-2010, 03:47 PM
I get it, and nobody should be attacking anyone else personally for their beliefs...but with any religious debate, it's bound to happen eventually. I understand your position, just wanted to show a different side to all of this crap.

I respect and appreciate that SCM. One of the reasons I started posting here again is because people like yourself, tony ( where the hell is tony anyways?) and ric make me pause and think. You don't change my mind per say, but you make me reach down deeper to find valid answers to the questions I have.

While I may argue with you I always respect what you bring to the discussion. :hatsoff:

SteelCityMom
10-01-2010, 04:03 PM
To further upon what I began to post about last night, the genocide in Rwanda, I stumbled upon a lot of different sites that go into detail about the RC Churches involvement in the mass genocide there.

Let me start off by saying, I remember this happening, but I never knew the extent of it. In April of 1994 500k-800k (3/4 of the population in Rwanda) were massacred over a period of 100 days.

I found this in a summary of the events that led up to and followed the genocide of the Tutsis. This expounds on my previous point about the RC Church feeling it doesn't need to live up to the rest of the worlds human rights standards and why they have failed to sign most of the articles dealing with human rights. They are still harboring nuns and priests who contributed to the slaughter of Tutsi people to this day.

E.S.40. Together, military leaders and the new interim government of Hutu Power supporters sworn in after the crash made the overall decisions, while Rwanda’s elaborate governing structure implemented the genocide with gruesome efficiency. All received indispensable support from the Hutu leadership of the Catholic and Anglican churches. With some heroic exceptions, church leaders played a conspicuously scandalous role in these months, at best remaining silent or explicitly neutral. This stance was easily interpreted by ordinary Christians as an implicit endorsement of the killings, as was the close association of church leaders with the leaders of the genocide. Perhaps this helps explain the greatest mystery about the genocide: the terrible success of Hutu Power in making so many ordinary people accomplices in genocide. In no other way could so many human beings have been killed so swiftly.

E.S.44. The facts are not in question: A small number of major actors could directly have prevented, halted, or reduced the slaughter. They include France in Rwanda itself; the US at the Security Council; Belgium, whose soldiers knew they could save countless lives if they were allowed to remain in the country; and Rwanda’s church leaders. In the bitter words of the commanders of the UN’s military mission, the "international community has blood on its hands."

E.S.45. In the years since, the leaders of the UN, the US, Belgium, and the Anglican church have all apologized for their failures to stop the genocide. No apology has yet come from the French government or the Catholic church. Nor has any responsible government or institution suggested that Rwanda is owed restitution for these failures, and in no single case has any responsible individual resigned in protest or been held to account for his or her actions during this period.

From our "Christian leaders" in the US

E.S.42. Until the day the genocide ended with the RPF’s military victory in the civil war, the UN, the governments of the US, France, and Belgium, African governments, and the OAU, all failed to define the massacres as a full-blown genocide. All continued to recognize members of the genocidaire government as legitimate official representatives of Rwanda. All except the French government retained a neutral public stance between a government practising genocide and that government’s sole adversary, the RPF. In practice, however, neutrality allowed the genocide to happen. Once the genocide began, the US repeatedly and deliberately undermined all attempts to strengthen the UN military presence in Rwanda. Belgium became an unexpected ally in this goal. On Day Two of the crisis, the day after the April 6, 1994, plane crash that killed President Habyarimana, 10 Belgian soldiers were murdered by Rwandan soldiers. As the radicals had anticipated, Belgium immediately decided to pull out all its troops, leaving the 2,000 Tutsi they were protecting at a school site to be slaughtered within hours. The Belgian government decided that its shameful retreat would be at least tempered if it were shared by others and strenuously lobbied to disband UNAMIR entirely. Although the US supported the idea, it was too outrageous to pursue. Instead, with the genocide taking tens of thousands of lives daily, the Security Council, ignoring the vigorous opposition of the OAU and African governments, chose to cut the UN forces in half at the exact moment they needed massive reinforcement. As the horrors accelerated, the Council did authorize a stronger mission, UNAMIR II, but once again the US did all in its power to undermine its effectiveness. In the end, not one single additional soldier or piece of military hardware reached the country before the genocide ended.

http://www.reliefweb.int/rw/rwb.nsf/db900sid/OCHA-64DEEY?OpenDocument

[QUOTE][Before the genocide more than 60% of Rwandans were Catholic.

And when the killings started, tens of thousands of Tutsis fled to churches for sanctuary. But they found little protection there.


Churches became sites of slaughter, carried out even at the altar.

On the opposite side of Kigali from Al Aqsa mosque, is the church of Sainte Famille. As dawn mass is celebrated, the sound of hymns carries outside and floats across the waking city.

During the genocide, hundreds of Tutsis crammed inside here trying to escape the horrors unfolding outside. But Hutu militias came repeatedly with lists of those to be killed.

The priest in charge of the church, Father Wenceslas Munyeshyaka, is blamed for colluding with the killers.

Discarding his priest's cassock, witnesses say he took to wearing a flack jacket and carrying a pistol.

"Some members of the Church failed in their mission, they contradicted what they stood for," says Father Antoine Kambanda, director of the charity, Caritas, in Kigali.

He acknowledges that while some priests and nuns risked their lives trying to stop the slaughter, others were implicated in the killings.

"We are sorry for what took place, sorry for the members of the Church that did crimes, sorry for the victims who lost their lives.

"But the Pope says the members who went against their mission are to answer for it. The Church cannot answer for them."/QUOTE]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/3561365.stm

SteelCityMom
10-01-2010, 04:06 PM
where the hell is tony anyways?

Tony's been a bad, bad boy...and is currently receiving "therapy". It should be over as soon as the gimp is done with him.

http://i475.photobucket.com/albums/rr120/pinklatexblog/Bring-out-the-gimp.jpg

SteelCityMom
10-01-2010, 04:07 PM
I respect and appreciate that SCM. One of the reasons I started posting here again is because people like yourself, tony ( where the hell is tony anyways?) and ric make me pause and think. You don't change my mind per say, but you make me reach down deeper to find valid answers to the questions I have.

While I may argue with you I always respect what you bring to the discussion. :hatsoff:

I respect your opinion as well, no matter how annoyed with it I may get. :chuckle:

Spirited debates are fun though, and you are correct, it forces you to look at your own thoughts and views in a different light (which is always a good thing). :drink:

SteelersinCA
10-01-2010, 04:59 PM
I don't hate Muslim's, I just don't like their religion very much. That not allowed these days?

btw I'll post what I want, when I want how, I want, so get over yourself Ca.

http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/Pages/Bible-Quran-Violence.htm

Here's today reading assignment see if you can figure out the relevance? .:duh:

You can post whatever you want, wherever you want for sure, but when 95% of your posts are the same thing over and over and over and over and over again, I will continue to post to get over it. Fair enough?

What am I to get over? Am I not entitled to an opinion? Only you are? My opinion is you beat a dead horse, we all know how you feel, mission accomplished. Now what is your point of continuing to post the same tired garbage? Do you think you are going to change someones mind? Is there going to be a "gotcha" moment coming up sometime? Honestly, why do you keep infesting threads with anti-muslims posts? The thread of this was "Canon Law." Unless there has been some kind of dogmatic shift in Islam, I'm pretty sure it has no bearing on this thread. So, again, what's your point?

It wasn't meant for you SCM. I was personally attacked, so i responded.

Awww, poor Zulater, how were you personally attacked?? (Here's a tissue) What did I say that wasn't true? Did I call you a name? Did I falsely attribute anything to you? Where is this attack you speak of? Saying give it a rest was an attack? Maybe it was the "we get it part?" Which part was the attack. If that was an attack, no wonder you are so scared of Muslims. :hug:

zulater
10-01-2010, 07:35 PM
You can post whatever you want, wherever you want for sure, but when 95% of your posts are the same thing over and over and over and over and over again, I will continue to post to get over it. Fair enough?

What am I to get over? Am I not entitled to an opinion? Only you are? My opinion is you beat a dead horse, we all know how you feel, mission accomplished. Now what is your point of continuing to post the same tired garbage? Do you think you are going to change someones mind? Is there going to be a "gotcha" moment coming up sometime? Honestly, why do you keep infesting threads with anti-muslims posts? The thread of this was "Canon Law." Unless there has been some kind of dogmatic shift in Islam, I'm pretty sure it has no bearing on this thread. So, again, what's your point?



Awww, poor Zulater, how were you personally attacked?? (Here's a tissue) What did I say that wasn't true? Did I call you a name? Did I falsely attribute anything to you? Where is this attack you speak of? Saying give it a rest was an attack? Maybe it was the "we get it part?" Which part was the attack. If that was an attack, no wonder you are so scared of Muslims. :hug:


Yeah you falsely accused me of hating Muslims when in fact it's Islam that I dislike.

And I'm not scared of Muslims, I'm only scared how small minded creeps get inspired to do awful things by fanatical Imans.