Catholics are Not the Problem

[MineralMan]

Not at all. It is the Roman Catholic Church as an organization that is the problem. It's not the parish priests, per se. It is the behemoth organization, from the local bishop up to the Pope that does the things that progressives object to. That is where the problems are.

Blaming Catholic parishioners makes no sense. It's their religious belief. I question it, and don't understand why many people don't leave that church for another, but that's a different story.

The inequities, intolerance, and ignorance that informs RCC doctrine in many areas is the responsibility of the bishops, cardinals and the Pope. They're the ones promulgating those things. Ordinary Catholics reject most of them on a regular basis.

The Roman Catholic Church officially opposes:

Contraception
A woman's right to choose in her own reproductive decisions
Equality for LGBT people
Marriage equality
The equality of women in the Church hierarchy and in society

Those are the issues. The organized RCC is opposed to all of those. Individual Catholics make their own decisions about them.

[southernyankeebelle]

1. Thank you for making it so clear. Sometimes I try on DU to explain why am still a catholic and

love my faith. Really catholics do think on their own. We go to our parish church because that is where people feel they belong. Your right however, I don't give my money to the church any longer. I think they don't spend the money on the right things we need. I don't want to support Rome or send money to help other poor countries. I know that is terrible to sound off like that. But charity begins at home. We have terrible problems here at home. People go to be hungry and many have no place to live. We have to do something for our own. Once we get back on our feet then we can help other nations again. People shouldn't have to worry where they are going to get their next meal or where they are going to sleep.

[MineralMan]

2. I have no brief at all with Catholics.

Everyone has the freedom to believe or disbelieve whatever they wish.

[southernyankeebelle]

7. Thank you anyway. Sometimes people who really do say things on DU that are not nice against

catholics. You made the point very well for us who have a hard time explaining our position.

[CurtEastPoint]

3. Double amen.

[liberal_at_heart]

27. you sound like a good Catholic and a good person

[southernyankeebelle]

34. I want to be. But our church makes it hard to be at times. I hate to say it but I've become a

cafeteria catholic. I don't get out of it what I use to. I don't know if it is just the priest or its something more. I am so disappointed in the way they align themselves with Fundies. This mix of religion and politics makes me ill. I feel the church has left me. I still have my faith. But the catholic church is my church and I don't like when people who especially aren't even catholic have bad things to say about it. I try to go during the holidays or I try to watch mass on tv. I hope this new pope will make changes for the better. I read that he doesn't think that priest who abuse people should be passed to another church. He thinks they need to be kicked out of the priesthood. I hope that is true. That would be a good start in the right direction.

[pnwmom]

46. Almost everybody is a cafeteria Catholic,

on both sides of the spectrum.

People like Paul Ryan reject all the economic teachings of the Church -- the "preferential option for the poor." They're just as much "cafeteria Catholics" as any liberal.

[southernyankeebelle]

98. Heck I even question that he is a real catholic. He has lost the basics of the catholic teachings

of helping others. He only believes in helping the rich and corporations. Like Jesus said about the rich man going through the eye of the needle. It will be hard for them.

[Skidmore]

72. I would venture to say to you that the

church has not left you but stayed pretty much where it has been for centuries. Religions are pretty much that way--immovable and intractable citadels that people come to. Some die out, others morph. The monotheisms seem to just stay put.

[southernyankeebelle]

97. Well you might be right. I do like tradition. There was a time I wouldn't even go to a girl that

was an altar boy. But I now know that is very silly. I also thought at one time women shouldn't be priests but I know I've change on that. I also thought priests should never marry. I now know they should be able to be married and we should be able to have women priests. I have come a long way. The church will have to change or die. They know it.

[SidDithers]

4. Without Catholic parishioners, there would be no Catholic behemoth...

Why do so many people choose to remain part of an organization that holds so many positions they don't believe in?

Sid

[Apophis]

5. ...

[knitter4democracy]

9. For many reasons.

While I'm not Catholic, I'm Eastern Orthodox and know what it's like when my church leaders come out publicly and say something I disagree with.

I stay in my church because it's my family. I stay for the prayers, the place to pray when nowhere else feels right, the chance to confess my sins to someone who won't judge me but help me change into a better person, for the beauty of liturgy that takes all of us create, for the good things people do.

Everyone gets up in arms about the Catholics, but what few realize is that the problem is far worse in the Protestant churches. They just are so many that it waters down the numbers. If we did a per capita comparison, I'd bet (even though I don't gamble) that the Protestants have far more predators in their midst disguised as leaders. I went to an evangelical Christian college, and while there were good people in the religion department, there were predators who were passed along and ended up getting churches. It's all hush-hush, and most predators get passed along instead of arrested and charged.

Power corrupts. Those who stay do so for their own, personal reasons that have nothing to do with those in power.

[southernyankeebelle]

39. My husband was a catholic and changed to the Eastern Orthodox church. Your comment is true.

I do love the tradition of my church. Some people just like the same traditions. By the way I love the way they sing through the services in the Orthodox church. It's so beautiful. I also love how people get together and enjoy a nice meal after the services.

[knitter4democracy]

54. I was Nazarene and converted after college.

I need the singing, the icons, the incense, all of it. The food's nice, too.

[southernyankeebelle]

96. Yes he is the same way.

[Drahthaardogs]

15. That is completely inaccurate.

Canon Law is well documented and Vatican City is a country. It will exist and is immortalized in law whether people attend Mass or not. I wish Protestants would quit writing about the Church if they have no knowledge of the Magisterium, Canon Law, and the Catechism...Oh and Papal Infallibility and ex-cathedra.


I get so tired of posts where people make assumptions that are incorrect.

Edit for a space.

[SidDithers]

59. "I wish Protestants would quit writing..."

"I get so tired of posts where people make assumptions that are incorrect. "



Sid

[MineralMan]

16. I cannot answer your question.

However, it is not parishioners who set doctrine in that church. Neither do they choose their own priests. For some, the particular religious beliefs of the Catholic Church are the only ones they can follow. It does not necessarily follow that they contribute money to support the political behaviors of the overall RCC.

I am an atheist. I don't belong to any religious organization.

[defacto7]

88. Human nature...

or habit. Ever wonder why people who are controlled by cults are unable to leave? Ever wonder why there are certain Republicans that hate the modern Republican party but can't leave it?

[Skittles]

102. because they are conditioned to do so, mostly by family

there's no other real explanation

[jsr]

6. Every Catholic I know rejects the church's teachings on those items

Yet at the same time they consider themselves good Catholics. It's not a monolithic organization like people think.

[jerseyjack]

8. If I contribute money that supports the ideas of the Tea Party,

am I also not part of the problem?

[knitter4democracy]

10. What makes you think they contribute money?

I know many Catholics who don't give their tithes to the Church any more but instead charities or whatever.

[southernyankeebelle]

41. I am one who no longer gives to the church. I give to the local DHS. They have a list of many

families that need help. Especially during the holidays. No more money to any church. They get tax exempts. I don't want my money going to Rome and maintaining the Vatician.

[bettyellen]

92. if you want to get married, go to Catholic School or baptize your kid, etc....

there are required "donations". There were minimum weekly amounts, and for families like mine who were basically poor, they adjusted that the weekly amounts downward and let us enroll and do the sacraments anyway.

But make no mistake- they took the names of those envelopes and kept tight records of what people put in- even us school kids. Our local churches are down to less than 100 "donor families" and say it is unsustainable.

At grade school, we had to explain if we had no contributions, so I handed my envelope off to an altar boy friend so I could skip mass.

[knitter4democracy]

94. Many have stopped giving, as you cite.

They may keep attending, but they don't give.

Payments to Catholic schools are kept separate from any parish or diocesan funds. They either go into paying the usual costs or go into the endowment.

[bettyellen]

100. but if you want to participate with your family, it's not optional- no sacraments are given, no

weddings or baptism without regular weekly contributions and one tie payments for training etc for the sacraments. Some will work out deals where you "make up for it". Even getting a mass card will cost you 20$ these days.
And to attend school, regular weekly envelopes were expected *in addition* to fees for the school. Kids who were not baptized and going through the sacraments, not allowed.

So except for the single and childless forever, you can't go on forever getting a free ride. But maybe they are willing to let the connection so important to them to set aside the pedophilia, die out with their own kids.

I've know some people who had to go back to the church they grew up in, and pay big amounts to make up for their years away, because they wanted to hire a priest and have a Catholic wedding. They also had to lie and say they had been practicing and attending somewhere else, and kept up with the sacraments.

So in order to continue with this beautiful expression of their faith, they had to pay big money and lie through their teeth.
And everyone looks the other way.

[knitter4democracy]

103. Wow. I've taught in Catholic schools and not seen that.

Then again, I only taught in one attached to a particular parish, and in reality, it's the only one in the entire area and so not quite so strict on payments to the parish.

[bettyellen]

104. I had no idea either (except that they were monitoring my attendance) The office admin explained

hey had strict guidelines (I think i the sixties it was 5$ a week - so maybe 3X that now- and my parents only put 2-3$, and us 30-50 cents instead of the suggested dollar) but would indeed lower them if they knew the family was poorer. We had six kids go to that school, and they knew that was a huge burden on my parents. There was also a requirement that you had been a donating member for some time before enrolling a kid. (This is the same parochial school SC's Sonia Sotomayor went to, in the Bronx, which maybe closing soon)

I have friends who'd fake it and drop off envelopes at mass every week to keep in good standing. They were worried because they didn't really want the kids doing sacraments and confirming, etc, and have since moved schools.

I also have a habit of buying Mass card for Catholics when they pass, as I know this was very comforting to the family, so I am guilty occasionally of throwing them a 20$ myself. (used to be 5$!!) But if it comforts the bereaved, I can live with doing it. At least they listed my Mom as a "pray for" for free a few weeks when she was very ill. I forget the donation requested for the funeral- I think 400- 500$ or so? It was just a regularly scheduled mass, and the funeral parlour set up flowers and coffin, so that was kind of easy money, when I think about it.

Anyway, I don't see how anyone except a single childless person will get over for long, I'm also bothered by the fact that they go there and sort of cheat the system. Why not find someplace you actually fit in and support?

[knitter4democracy]

105. I think that only applies to parish schools.

There's no way independents or semi-independents can keep track of that.

I agree about the money and the seeming hypocrisy, and while I agree that they could find somewhere else, where else would they go that is like the RCC enough but not so bigoted? Sadly, the Eastern Orthodox, while more liberal in many ways, aren't that much better when it comes to civil rights and women.

[onpatrol98]

13. Do you send money to politicians?

Do you believe in EVERY thing politicians do that you send money to? If you voted for Obama, was it because you believed in drones. I mean, maybe you do..., I'm just saying people seldom agree on EVERYTHING.

[Tom Rinaldo]

14. That really is an oversimplification.

Almost all of us pay taxes that have helped fund military actions that we oppose. And the argument that we are forced to pay taxes doesn't hold water. Not only are there tax resisters that we can join with, but all year most of us have argued on DU that we wanted the Bush Tax cuts on the rich to expire. We have argued that the Federal Government should increase its tax revenues, which then go directly into the overall federal treasury which funds our military. We do that because there are worthwhile things, in our opinion anyway, that the government also funds. We may argue that their shourt be cuts in the military but we do not precondition our support for raising certain taxes on guarentees that none of tha money will go to wars that we oppose.

When practicing Catholics donate money to their churches they are among other things funding the upkeep and operation of the actual churches that they attend mass in.

[Humanist_Activist]

17. Stop with this fucking stupid ass comparison...

Tax resistors go to jail, you can't just, on a fucking whim, refuse to become a U.S. citizen and no longer have to pay taxes.

Taxes are INVOLUNTARY, period. Donating to your church is voluntary, you suffer NO consequences by NOT doing it.

[Tom Rinaldo]

20. Read my entire post then

Have you ever advocated for increasing federal tax revenues? Like recently perhaps - maybe when the fiscal cliff debte was going on. Did you only support raising taxes on the rich if there were specific guarentees that none of the additional money that would go into the federal treasury from some people paying more taxes would support military uses that you oppose? Things like, Oh I don't know, drone strikes or operating the Gitmo prison, or planning for a possible war with Iran? What funds those things? Right, tax revenues, and here we all are arguing that the United States of America needs more of them. Sure we oppose certain uses of them, but that opposition still allows us to push for more funding that may pay for more war.

And though I am not among those who believe it - for some believers disobeying the Church comes at the price of going to Hell. Some might say that is even worse than going to jail.

[Humanist_Activist]

21. Again, voluntary versus involuntary, and the involuntary allows for some of my input...

apples and oranges.

ON EDIT: Also, there is NOTHING in Catholic Doctrine that absolutely requires you to donate to them in particular, volunteering or donating to any cause you believe in is a suitable substitute.

[Tom Rinaldo]

31. No analogy is perfect because reality isn't based on cloning

But I have advocated, by my own free will, for increasing funding for the United States government knowing full well that the United States government undertakes some actions that I have the deepest moral opposition toward.

For those who believe in institutionalized religion (again , I am not one of them but most likely a majority of Americans fit that description) you can not practice your religion as intended without without some physical infrastructure around which the religious activity of the congregation or parish or temple etc. is centered. Buildings etc. are built, they are heated, they are maintained. Ministers, rabbis, reverends, priests and immans almost all get paid or supported in somoe other ways, and almost all must attend some institution or another for training that is subsidized to varying degrees by the faith which they are being trained to serve in.

That is is just covering the basics - kind of like paying for the machinery of a democratic government; salaries, legislative chambers, voting machines etc. Beyond that there is a host of functions and activities and causes etc. It is rare that any of us support everything that our government or religious institution does. But it is rare for any of us to support none of them. The Catholic Church, like almost all religous institutions and more than many, funds charity work as well. Some of that may be subject to controversy, other subject to praise, and some subject to both.

But for anyone to argue that a member of the Catholic faith who cares about social justice must (emphasis on must) withdraw all support from their Church is, in an inverted way , a varient of the "love it or leave it" arguement that the Right in this country routinely hurls at any liberal who is critical of anything that our government does.

[Humanist_Activist]

43. Your argument falls apart in this regard...

Governments are necessary, religions are not. Even restricting things to the charitable side is rather, well, you end up funding more than you would want, for example adoptions through Catholic Charities(no gays need apply), or health services worldwide(condoms don't work to prevent AIDS spreading), etc. The faith may have a lot of social justice in it, the Church and its charities, not so much, or at least, they pervert it to something unrecognizable.

ON EDIT: The big issue is this, there exist secular charities and government programs that are non-discriminatory, effective, and transparent, that work just as well as religious charities.

[Tom Rinaldo]

60. We probably don't disagree as completely as it might seem

As you pretty directly implied above, so much of this comes down to what (and why) religion is. From your chosen name here I suspect that you are not, at the very least, deeply affiliated to any particular faith. That is more than fine with me if true. But billions of people in this world believe otherwise. If the world's people were asked to vote on which is more necessary, religion or government, I am not certain that government would win that vote.

In my life experience I have known all kinds of Christians, and Catholics. I know that some of the "good work" that some Catholics have dedicated themselves to has been, from my perspective, profound in the most positive ways. I do not argue that non-believers have not similarly engaged in the same types of profound endeavors - but everyone has their own motivation, or calling, for doing those things. For some it is religion and for some of those it is Catholicism.

I think it is beyond my ability, or this boards, to convince believers not to hold true to their faith, or even to simply abandon the church they consider themselves part of. I look for and find common cause with millions of beleivers where I can. And i work to advance the issues I believe in even where it challanges the beliefs of some faithful. I don't find those two priorities to be mutually irreconcialable.

[Humanist_Activist]

73. I'm not even asking them not to hold true to their faith, just don't donate to the Church itself...

its mostly closed books, and the Church values good works so much, you can substitute it by volunteering at a daycare or something.

[merrily]

62. The Bible requires tithing.

[Humanist_Activist]

64. The Bible does, the Catholic Church doesn't. n/t

[merrily]

66. The Church requires obedience to the Bible.

edited for grammar.

[Humanist_Activist]

69. Well, technically, but it isn't fundamentalist in its reading...

also tithing can be substituted with "good works" which can be literally anything charitable, whether its volunteering for a soup kitchen to donating old clothes to Goodwill, money to Red Cross, etc.

[merrily]

76. Are you saying that is a teaching of the Catholic Church?

[Humanist_Activist]

77. That is what I was taught in PSR, though my memory may be fuzzy.

The whole tithing thing is more a request rather than a requirement.

[merrily]

79. As best I know, the giving must be to the Catholic Church or Catholic related charities.

ETA: And volunteering is not part of the tithe.

[Humanist_Activist]

81. Never heard of the restriction being that severe...

granted I think they don't count political activism and certain other activities(or at least, that used to be the case, if I remember), but if its something truly charitable, then it works. I could be wrong.

[Ikonoklast]

99. You are totally incorrect.

The RCC requires of Catholics no such thing.

You aren't a Catholic, are you?

[MineralMan]

26. I would suggest a little less offensive approach to the discussion.

While you're not directly posting an personal attack, your post is the equivalent of one. You can discuss the issue without that, I'm sure.

[Humanist_Activist]

45. Problem is that its a tired and thoroughly discredited argument, I get sick of hearing it. n/t

[MineralMan]

47. Then counter it. There's no need for the

insulting language. Truly. All that creates is obstinacy. That's never productive.

[MineralMan]

18. Yes, you would be, since it is purely a political organization.

However, a church is something different. Even though the RCC officially takes some political positions, not all Catholics, lay or priests, take the same positions. It is entirely possible to be a faithful Catholic and never donate a penny that goes beyond the local parish.

[Humanist_Activist]

23. How do you know it doesn't go beyond the local parish?

Millions of dollars from many different archdioceses were used to fund anti-marriage equality measures in 4 states this last election cycle. Most of that money came out of the Knights of Columbus or Archdioceses themselves. Are you saying none of the money donated to local parishes went towards that?

[MineralMan]

25. Individual Catholic can decide to donate or not to donate.

Targeted donations are also possible. I do not know, nor do you, how any member of the Catholic Church makes or does not make donations. Only those members know that.

As for the Knights of Columbus or any similar sub-group, I assume they receive donations from people who wish to donate to that particular organization.

This is a problem common to all places one donates. I know of zero organizations whose only operations are ones that I approve. Not one.

[Humanist_Activist]

49. Doctor's without Borders(just throwing it out there)...

Uhm, Girl Scouts, Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, Food not Bombs, etc.

Also, I'm talking in particular, putting money in the collection basket during Mass, that isn't directed, and, unlike the organizations I listed above, the Catholic Church has no legal requirement to report where that money goes.

[MineralMan]

51. I can find objections to all of those, frankly.

Actually, parishioners do get reports on how their donations are distributed, I have learned. Special collections are made with some regularity, as well, that are directed specifically.

The basic collection basket receipts don't do much, if anything, to support the hierarchy. These days, individual parishes are strapped for funds, due to decreasing attendance and, in some cases, changes in the surround demographic.

In any case, an individual parishioner may choose to donate or not. Many do not.

[Humanist_Activist]

55. But, generally speaking, parishioners have little control, and again, without legal obligations...

the parish and archdiocese are free to lie all they want.

[Cirque du So-What]

11. I harbor no ill will toward individual Roman Catholics

but the behemoth you mention was built over time with tithes from individuals and families, beginning back in the so-called dark ages. It was back in that superstitious age that the foundations of papal infallibility and patriarchy were first laid. I will not belabor this post with anything resembling a comprehensive history of the intervening years, but is there any doubt that the blind trust in clergy has led to the situations - in this modern-day age of superstition - which are just recently coming to light? In my youth, I recall that Roman Catholic parents thought nothing of sending their children on overnight or weekend trips with the parish priest; only in the past few years have some of these boys - now adults - come forward to reveal abuse at the hand of a supposedly trustworthy - dare I say, holy - individual. Some tried to broach the subject with their parents at the time this abuse occurred, but the notion that such things could occur was absolutely unbelievable, so the parents performed somersaults of logic in order to deny it and the priest was free to continue this abhorrent practice.

I recognize that a good many modern Roman Catholics approach their religion in a 'cafeteria-style' manner - picking and choosing exactly which tenets and dogma they choose to follow - but if they continue to feed the beast with their tithes, they share in culpability for the abused children, the condemnation reserved for those who choose for themselves how and when to have children, and the horrific spread of AIDS due to pontifical disapproval of the use of condoms. Any talk of the 'rich traditions' and 'good works' falls on my deaf ears. Traditions mean shit to me when viewing the big picture, and there are countless ways to finance good works without supporting institutionalized abuse, self-enrichment and the pursuit of power.

[MineralMan]

19. There is nothing unique about some Catholic priests

being pedophiles. That occurs regardless of denomination and is an individual act of an individual priest or whomever. That the official Church hierarchy covered up such behavior is more than deplorable. However, it was not a universal thing, and the vast majority of priests did not engage in either the activity or the coverups.

Putting blame where it belongs is important.

[Cirque du So-What]

22. I disagree with the assertion that it is not unique

Sure, there are clergy in every denomination who abuse children (and sometimes adults) by 'virtue' of their position and the trust that people place in them, but AFAIK there is no denomination in which this abuse is institutionalized to the extent that occurs in the Roman Catholic church - going so far as to shuffle aberrant priests around to parishes where they can begin abusing children all over again when their activities start coming under scrutiny. That institutional tolerance toward abuse, to me, defines 'unique.' It makes no difference to me what percentage of clergy is guilty; if one aberrant priest is sheltered and placed in a position to abuse again, that is one too many.

[MineralMan]

24. You're incorrect. Such behavior on the part of church leadership

exists far beyond the Catholic Church. I saw it in my own denomination when I was a kid, and I've seen it in other churches as well. And then, we have the Boy Scouts of America, which has been revealed to have perpetrated such a thing for decades.

Yes, one pedophile with trusted access to children is one too many. No matter where it occurs. One higher-up who kicks that can up the street is one too many, as well, and such crap goes on in many, many organizations. It's just that the RCC is a very large organization and it did this over a long period. We found out about it.

So, it's most certainly not limited to one church or one organization. Not by any means.

[Cirque du So-What]

28. Your experiences are different from mine

although my 'religious experience' - from which I am still recovering - was within a congregationalist-type protestant denomination. I was aware of several instances where youth pastors committed statutory rape with girls in the churches, but in each case, they were either prosecuted forthwith or, in one case, made a groom in a shotgun wedding.

[MineralMan]

40. I'm sure they are. We all have our own experiences.

I try not to assume that others have the same ones I have.

[Zoeisright]

56. Wrong.

The MASSIVE pedophilia and MASSIVE coverup in the Catholic church is unique. And parishoners who donate money to these criminals are enabling the crimes and the coverup. If you can't see that, you're beyond reason.

[Lordquinton]

95. Until there is evidence

that shows that other organizations have it on such a scale that they have an office dedicated to shuffling the priests around (Who was that guy? oh yea, someone named Ratizinger, later to be named Pope) then your argument is a false equivalency, just like you pointing out that every charity organization does some things you disagree with, RCC is the only one that does so much bad along with it.

[pnwmom]

53. The Catholic clergy doesn't have any higher incidence of offenders than men in other

institutions, according to all the research. And parents have thought nothing of sending their children on overnight trips with the local boy scout leaders, have they? Or with the local college football coach. Or with nice Uncle Arnold. This has nothing to do with parental superstition.

Most people, in most parts of the world, until relatively recently, were too trusting that this kind of thing wouldn't happen to their children. The US has been on the forefront of recognizing that this is a huge, pervasive problem that is not limited to one church. What is different is that individual pedophiles, because of the structure of the Catholic Church, were pushed from parish to parish and thus impacted that many more lives. But this wasn't because of parental superstition or "somersaults of logic."

[Cirque du So-What]

58. I've witnessed those somersaults of logic firsthand

when classmates confided in me that they had been abused by priests, but when they told their parents, they absolutely could not believe that a consecrated man of the cloth could do such a thing, so the accusations were dismissed out-of-hand. That capacity for double-think can only exist in an atmosphere of institutional brainwashing. In the case of one priest, who was the principal of the local parochial school, the boys even made a joke (albeit gallows humor) about being chased around his desk when called to his office. This went on for YEARS!

[pnwmom]

61. So have I -- with the relatives of a woman I know who was molested by her family member.

People have lots of reasons for not believing their children that have nothing to do with institutional brainwashing.

[Cirque du So-What]

71. Regardless

Would instilling parishioners, from childhood onward, with the notion that the priest - imbibed with supernatural powers that include transubstantiation of bread and wine into the *actual* body and blood of Christ - is the be-all to end-all of every aspect of their lives, including when and how many children to have, be MORE likely or LESS likely to be trusted above all the other reasons (which I have YET to see) why parents do not trust things their children tell them?

[pnwmom]

78. I saw plenty of hero worship among the people involved in the Penn State case. nt

[Cirque du So-What]

85. And that further reinforces my case

that dogma - whether in the form of religious mysticism or athletic program worship - is capable of inducing somersaults of logic. Answer me this: is it more likely or less likely that dogma instilled since early childhood resembles brainwashing than idolatry associated with a college football program? Are you *really* going to attempt conflating the two? If people, by their very nature, are so inclined to blind trust in authority, then isn't it all the more likely that they would succumb to brainwashing under the auspices of an organization that holds their salvation in its hands? I don't recall that Penn State ever threatened anyone with excommunication for liking Northwestern.

[pnwmom]

90. No, it reinforces my case.

The point I made at the start of this thread: molesters are in all walks of life, and Catholic priests are no more likely to be offenders than other men. The problem is that the structure of the Church allowed these men to be moved from parish to parish, giving them access to more children than if they had been turned in by the authorities.

This wasn't a problem with the parents being different from other parents in similar situations.

[Cirque du So-What]

91. We could do this all day

but I ain't gonna. I'll leave it with my assertion that it's much more likely that parents will choose to ignore abuse if it's done by a member of the clergy in a religion that has imbibed that clergy with supernatural powers and who is the sole intecessor between the parishioner and the savior - especially if that notion has been drummed into their own heads since their own childhood.

True, molesters are not confined to the RCC, and I never claimed such a thing. However, I find it particularly abhorrent that the hierarchy of the church has engaged in a conspiracy to cover up cases by assigning molesting priests to new parishes, where they could begin their activities all over again. It's no mystery to me that would-be child molesters are drawn to positions of power over children and their parents, so I believe in stringent safeguards that include psychological screening before any adult is provided unsupervised access to children - and that includes the RCC, any other church, Boy Scout leaders and any civic club you can name.

[socialindependocrat]

12. Most of my Catholic friends...

who grew up and went to Catholic school all the way thru high school will joke about spending the rest of their life trying to unburden themselves from all the baggage they were taught in their younger years.
It's like a right of passage.

I also have heard a lot of Catholic friends talk very fondly about the priests who have
said things to them that were not supportive of the Catholic teachings. They were very
glad that a priest would confide in them and let them know that the teachings of the church
are, sometimes, too restrictive and they don't agree.

Then, I took a religion class at a Catholic college (how I got there is a loooooong story) but
the priest explained that during on of their Pope and Cardinal get-togethers back in the 60s
they discussed birth control and the Cardinals all agreed that they should evolve with the rest
of society and accept birth control but the Pope put his foot down and said that they would not.
So, based on the decision of this one pope the church has had this anti-birth control battle going
on for the past 50 years. One of the Catholics in the class said - I thought that it was God who said
we couldn't have birth control and it was just the Pope. Things are going to change around my house
from now on and we all chuckled.

For what it's worth...

[BellaLuna]

29. Individual Catholics tend to believe those same things though

It's like saying don't blame a republican for actions of the elected Republican idiots who do what they do.

IF someone supports an institution responsible for those things you mention the are enabling that organization by supporting it, even if they do not agree with every view.


I see what you're getting at but there has to be accountability for looking the other way on the bad that is the Church.

[MineralMan]

33. That is not true overall, frankly.

Some believe in such doctrines. Many do not. If you want to know how an individual Catholic believes, ask him or her. The answers may surprise you, on all of those issues.

When it comes to politics, I look at individuals, not religious institutions.

[BellaLuna]

42. You are confusing what people believe with what they support

Supporting an organization that has the views you have is part of he problem.

I get the Catholics who don't buy into the views of the Church and pick and choose what they want to. THAT really is hypocritical if you think about it.

I was raised Catholic -even have a priest in the family. I know all to well what you are saying - but it's still wrong to associate with an organization that is so homophobic, misogynist, has child abuse enablers etc.. That's why I pulled away from it. I was associated with very wrong things.

[MineralMan]

44. You made a choice. Everyone does that.

Personally, if I were a Catholic, I'd switch denominations, probably to an ELCA church. The beliefs are very similar, the liturgy is very similar, but they don't hold those offensive positions. There are minor doctrinal differences between the ELCA and the RCC in religious matters, but they are really pretty insignificant.

However, if someone is comfortable with the religious beliefs of a church, they needn't leave. It's easy enough not to provide financial support to the hierarchy.

[MineralMan]

30. To extend my original post.

I know a number of Catholics. In November, we had an election. On the ballot was a constitutional amendment that would prohibit any marriage other than between a man and a woman. Despite the local Roman Catholic Archdiocese's funding of a very expensive campaign FOR that amendment, every single Catholic I know voted against it.

The Archbishop was wrong to put the power of the church behind that amendment. Catholics rejected it, or at least the ones I know did. The amendment failed, and now we have a legislature that is considering a law that would make same-sex marriage legal in the state. It actually has a fairly good chance of passage, and our Governor says he will sign it.

So, individual Catholics are free to go against the political efforts of the RCC organization, and do, in many cases and in many ways.

[OldDem2012]

32. Bingo. "The Roman Catholic Church as an organization...is the problem".....

....and that problem has existed from the time the Catholic Church created an hierarchical structure that could easily be corrupted. That same criticism can be applied to any religious or political organization.

[MineralMan]

36. It can, indeed be applied to any organization.

I know of exactly no organizations with which I am in complete accord. Not a single one. And yet, I choose to support some organizations because they do good things, overall. An example is the Union Gospel Mission here in St. Paul, MN. I'm an atheist, and I don't much like it that they do some evangelism with the homeless people they help. However, their programs for the homeless are the best ones in the area, and extend far, far beyond that evangelism.

So, that organization is the one I choose to support in that cause. That support comes after looking into all of the various organizations that serve the homeless here.

[HockeyMom]

35. The majority of Catholic people, no, BUT

you do have a small minority (like the Freepers) who think the doctrine of Rome is the only morality there should be. We also have Repuke, notice I did not say Dems, Catholic legislators, who think they were elected by God, and it's their duty as Catholic politicians to legislate what Rome teaches became it is the ONLY moral view. Good example of this is Llittle Ricky Santorum.

I agree with another poster's description of going to Catholic school although as a female I must say it was the younger NUNS who would literally raised their eyebrows at much of Rome's teachings. All I can say about that is that didn't cease being WOMEN when they became nuns so they understood.

[MineralMan]

38. When it comes to politics, I look at individuals, not the organizations

they belong too, generally.

[we can do it]

37. Nailed it.

[StarlightGold]

48. I'm sorry, but

if this was a restricted club, that the owners/managers demonized blacks, Jewish, women, etc. there would be NO question here...we would all be horrified is anyone here boasted about belonging to such an organization. Excuses such as "Well, I'VE had wonderful experiences with them" and "I KNOW that the organization is rotten to the core. Sorry if thousands upon thousands of lives have been ruined by it, but, hey I GOT MINE." would be laughed off the board.

This is why the church is so arrogant and doesn't think they need to change. As long as there are people breathing a word of defence for there shit, they will continue to run roughshod over millions.

Too bad to see that the church has such a strangle hold on so many.

[StarlightGold]

50. Oops...

"don't" think they need to change...and... THEIR shit, not "there"...

[alarimer]

52. What is the point of belonging to a religion when you don't follow ALL of the teachings?

Why do it then? I do not get why people are Catholics, knowing that using birth control (which many do, despite the church's teachings on that) will send you to hell. Or any number of other times when what is convenient for the individual is wrong, according to the church, anyway. It makes no sense to me.

Of course I believe critical thinking inevitably leads to atheism, as a logic outcome. Once you start questioning the teachings of any religious because they fail any logical test, the only possible final outcome is atheism.

[RT_Fanatic]

89. It makes no sense to me, either

My wife is upset because I have rejected the RCC (all religion, specifically) yet she admits to her cafeteria catholicism, to which I always have to answer, "why belong if you aren't going to follow the teachings?" She then usually goes all Pascal's Wager on me, at which I just shake my head and change the subject.

[Bennyboy]

57. Catholic parishoners are also not part of the solution either...

In regards to the child molestation ring Catholics have done nothing. Did you ever write a strongly worded letter asking that this be investigated? Did you portest at your church or did you continue to toss money in the collection plate?

I googled "kennedy speaks out about rapes catholic" and i got NOTHING, Same with Kerry and Mother Theresa.. No prominent Catholics have said jack shit about it. the rank and file aren't saying anything about it either. I've asked at least 100 catholics what tehy did to tell teh church that they did not want their kids raped and they all said NOT A THING.

[jsr]

67. Nothing? Catholics are SUING them.

Over 3,000 lawsuits.
$2.6 billion paid as of 2009.

[Bennyboy]

70. the plaintiffs who were directly harmed ... but the rank and file?

or are these random parishoners here that are suing the church for damages?

[bettyellen]

93. Is anyone aside from the direct victims doing anything?

[merrily]

63. I don't think it is that simple.

[Nye Bevan]

65. Just as I voted for President Obama in 2008 even though he opposed gay marriage at that time,

people can be Catholics while still being pro-choice, pro-contraception etc.

[merrily]

75. True, but the Church opposes "cafeteria Catholics."

I don't know that the political analogy holds up.

Part of a religious belief in the Abrahamic religions is believing that certain things have been handed down directly by God. Politics has no counterpart to that.

Also we have a finite number of political parties for whom to vote.

At some point, one has to grapple with the issue of how much Catholic doctrine can you reject and still really be a Catholic?

[jsr]

80. In reality there is nothing they can do about it

Cafeteria style has become a fact of life for most U.S. Catholics.

[Nye Bevan]

83. I would say that every Catholic DUer is a "cafeteria Catholic".

I doubt that there are DUers who believe that all abortions and all contraception (with the exception of the rhythm method) should be banned. And just as there are a finite number of political parties, there are a finite number of churches.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

68. "Power tends to corrupt, absolute power corrupts absolutely." Lord Acton

And, therein lies the problem for religions, governments, corporations, schools, you name it.

[Cleita]

74. Any organization that doesn't treat women as equals is bound to fail

in a lot of respects. The Catholic Church is no different. They need to start bringing the female clergy into the mainstream of the Church by allowing those who want to be priests take orders, which then gives them the opportunity to become Bishops, Cardinals and even Pope. Frankly, the Church isn't as down on gays as you might think. I had many gay teachers, both nuns and priests. Some were even open about it, but since they were supposed to practice celibacy, it wasn't a big issue. It's the gay sex they object to as sinful not the sexual orientation. Really, why would anybody not a Catholic and involved in a Catholic lifestyle whether lay or clergy, think they have the answers when they don't really know the question?

[sulphurdunn]

82. The Catholic Church is a theocratic

foreign state. The Catholic laity have even less power over what it does than we have over our representative government, which isn't saying much for our government.

[Rex]

84. You have to blame the leadership of an organized religion.

THEY are the ones at the helm making policy.

[Phillip McCleod]

86. in my discussions here i've tried to be clear..

.. to be clear in my criticism of the rcc that i mean the 'church hierarchy' by referring right away to the hierarchy of the church. i may not always acknowledge the fact that most u.s. catholics disagree with the hierarchy's position, but then so far i've just *assumed* most catholics here disagree with the church hierarchy (see how i did that?) based on this datum. that we're on the same side on these topics and try not to broadbrush anyone.

that said i have noticed, and i haven't been here that long, there have been a few apologists and defenders of the hierarchy itself. some have taken offense to news items and conversation that paint the church in a bad light, but we didn't write the news, and gee i'm sorry the hierarchy did something to embarrass itself.. AGAIN.. but if liberal catholics think they're powerless to change the church's positions and hierarchy's behavior, how must the rest of us feel? it's not even our church and we have to endure its leaders' nonsense.

is it any wonder it's a perennial topic for debate? or that the appointment of a new monarch in vatican city would be of broad interest and spark a wide range of passionate reactions?

some have or are threatening to leave DU if 'anti-catholic bigotry' doesn't stop but for the most part i've seen people with the same attitude as your OP MineralMan.. i think we understand perfectly well the difference between the rcc hierarchy and the laity.

in fact i'd guess a fair amount of the catholic bashing i've seen has been in reaction someone celebrating the new pope. it's like football (either sort).. if 'you' (the royal 'you') don't want someone bashing your favorite team, don't root for them in public. similarly.. don't celebrate the coronation of an absolute monarch and i, for one, promise not to make fun.

[MellowDem]

87. Yes they are part of the problem...

Blaming Catholic parishoners as being part of the problem makes a lot of sense. Their religious belief doesn't get a pass from criticism because it has the word "religious" in it. You say you question their religious belief and don't understand why they don't leave, and that's EXACTLY the issue, not a "different story".

Any people who continue to be members of and identify themselves with religious organizations that have offical conservative positions, who recruit almost exclusively through the abusive practice of childhood indoctrination, whose beliefs are based in faith and not logic of any sort, who stay with a church/mosque/synagouge based on things like tradition and social pressure, are indeed part of the problem that is religion hindering progress.

Not just Catholics, all religious people who choose to identify with religions with such official positions of misogyny and homophobia are part of the problem.

Some people view their religion as though it's a birthright and not a choice. Well that's wrong, and a product of normalizing child indoctrination as somehow not abusive (and that's a whole other thread). It's a choice to remain, and when you identify yourself with a religion that is homophobic and misogynistic, you are part of the problem and you will be criticized for it. No, you are not personally being attacked for an inherent trait you can't change, you are having your beliefs or associations with institutions with certain beliefs criticized.

Individual Catholics may indeed be against these things, but then they should stop identifying as Catholics if that's the case. Otherwise, they are engaging in cognitive dissonance and intellectual dishonesty and will be criticized for it. No, this isn't bigotry.

As an example, maybe my parents raise me in the KKK, and I enjoy the culture and community involved, but don't agree with any of the offical positions. However, I continue to identify myself as a member of the KKK. Yes, I'm part of the problem. And yes, you have to realize a lot of people that have been discriminated against because of the bigotry of religion will see it no different (and it really isn't, even without the word "religous&quot

[Bennyboy]

101. DIng, Ding, Ding, Ding... Very eloquent...

very nice. exactly how i feel and wish I had that skill to be so eloquent when trying to express my feelings.