Bishops defend Polish family

Careful, Polonius - I never said that. One must be mindful of Polish criminal libel laws when making such an accusation.

Bearing false witness. Number nine.
Posters should refrain from using abusive or derogatory language (unless it's necessary to explain the language's nuances). Posters who use abusive or derogatory language towards other users may be banned.

Number 2.

Either you have never darkened the door of a real chruch or subscribe to the Jehova's Witnesses' Decalogue. But in normal Cahtolic parlance No. 5 is Thou shalt not kill!

Now those guys are very family orientated indeed. Their religion has a very high turnover of members, however among the ones who are either devout or second/third generation, I've never met one I didn't like.

washingtonpost/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/04/11/AR2008041103327.html

The Roman Catholic Church "Contemplative Life" comes from the Greek cynics. The whole concept that the material world doesn't matter. When you mix politics with that philosophy it becomes lethal as evidenced by the Roman Catholic Inquisition. This is where the Roman Church diverges from Christianity which is based on charity not Greek Cynicism.

Which commandment is it that says "thou shall not have any false gods before me"? Like putting the rituals of the Roman Catholic Church before the word of God.

An article from 2008? ABOUT AN EVENT IN 2005? Really? in the ..*cure dramatic music* OPINIONS section? Something that is 2 elections ago?
An opinon piece by a writer who used to have a bias against the catholic church but became a Catholic and is part of NCR and here:

So in any article he would REACH for catholic connection-firstto bash..now to praise. He is actually a celebrity of sorts in conversion.


I guess part my fault..I didnt specify on TODAY'S regime. and it still the article no STATISTICAL evidence on the lawmakers of time, only names which were obvious AND Republican. But any President would meet the NEW POPE elected 2005. DOH! That does not indicate closed door negotiations. Bush sure aint no catholic. Sometimes the right meets and shakes hands in views on Conservative, traditional values. That's all.Tsk!

Theoria, Praxis, and the Contemplative Life after Plato and Aristotle
edited by Thomas Bénatouïl, Mauro Bonazzi (About the Hellenistic Golden Age an philosophy schools)::


**"The Cynics are probably the most radical opponents of contemplative life[/b], since they do away not only with knowledge of heavens as useless but also intellectual knowledge asn imitation of god as a whole: See Diog Laert. 6.27 about Diogenes moking astronomy, also Diog.Laert.9.64-65 AND Sextus Adv. Math 11.20=fr 60-62 by Caizzi***

And um dude..no false God.. if there is a flaunt to the Commandments it would have to be..IDOLTRY...IMAGES. And who says allCatholics think it proper?

And I think the words of Daniel Burke can apply:


something gone crazy with bold-I cannot correct edit it- mod plz?)

it's not the philosophers that we're talking about here, it's the Catholic Church. The religious clerics taking perpetual vows of poverty, celibacy, etc. proves my point, it's a Cynics life that they pursue and a barking dog that they become. Roman Catholicism is based on the concept that you follow the rules and rituals of the Catholic Church and you will find salvation after death (death is their salvation). Christianity is about the here and now. Be charitable to yourself, be charitable to your neighbor and show your love for God by doing the right thing.

Your counter arguments are all rhetorical, you've learned nothing from your study of the classics. You should spend some time reading the Christian Bible (New Testament), the Gospel of Matthew is particularly applicable to today's world. God speaks to all of us, not just the Pope you silly girl.

This is not the situation in Poland where Protestants represent a tiny fraction of society, but I'm sure many PF-ers will be surprised to learn that in the USA more children are abused by Protestant ministers than by Catholic priests.

That shows the still existing pro-WASP and anti-Catholic bias of the mainstream American media, and mainstream US media influence the media all over the world.

Some things such as paedophilia amongst non-Catholic clergy and Jewish rabbis as well as the high suicide, drug abuse and domestic violence rate amongst homosexuals are clearly underreported. That's the PC way, highlight the misdeeds of your foes and turn a blind eye to those of your heroes, protégés and cronies.

huffingtonpost.com/valerie-tarico/the-protestant-clergy-sex_b_740853.html

Given that there are more than twice as many protestants in the USA as there are Catholics, it would no surprise at all to anybody with even half a brain.

OK, but if there is more Protesant sex abuse, then why don't the media write about it imore often instead of constantly zeroing in on the less offfending Catholoc clergy. Yet another proof of the US media's anti-Catholic bias.

And what aboutt the celibacy business. PC Church-bashers always give that as the reason for priestly abuse.

Why don't they write about it more? Probably because with the RCC the story is the sickening abuse and the equally sickening years of deliberate cover up on an international scale, but with protestants there's only half that story. Simple really: journalists write more about bigger stories, as any even halfway decent hack knows.

It's the media that do the cover-up for the Protestants and they don't wnat to blow their own cover. But in WASP America it's always open season on the Catholic-

Don't you think the kids abused by Protestant clergy suffer as much as RC vicitms, except there are more of them

Your own link shows that you're lying when you claim that the media cover up for protestants who abuse children.

Of course all victims suffer equally. The difference is that there's no international conspiracy to cover up the victims of protestant priests and there is with RCC priests. Which is why the RCC is the bigger story, as any hack knows.

As any hack knows the biggest one is about Rabbis (no cover up there whatsoever).

Do tell.

Though I'm not holding my breath for you to be able to provide the slightest shred of evidence that 'there are more of them'.

Harry has already expected there are more victims of Protestant clergy abuse, since there are more Protestants in the US. The only difference, according to him, is that there is no Protestant cover-up. But the fact that it isn't being widely written about amounts to a media cover-up. To the underaged victims of abuse does it really matter whether the Church, the media or anyone else did ther covering up? It does only to the RCC-bashers.

For those who doubt there is a built-in anti-Catholic bias in the mainstream US media, read this:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Catholicism_in_literature_and_media

Oh, well, if it's in Wikipedia, it must be true.

As for the untold story of the massive protestant cover up of their priests abusing children, that sounds like the scoop of a lifetime for some lucky journalist who knows one end of a pen from the other. Perhaps you know such a person?

Whenever you are at a loss for answers, you undermine the source. Wikipedia is unreliable. RCC sources are unrelaible. You will probably say that this academic soruce is also unrealibale because it goes agaisnt your Catholic-hating prejudice.

Penn State professor Philip Jenkens reported that between 2 to 3 percent of Protestant clergy are pedophiles. His same study reported that less than 1.7 percent of Catholic priests are pedophiles. There is simply no reason to think that clergy child molesters are solely a Catholic problem. - *The results of this survey were reported in the book, Ministerial Ethics by Joe Trull and James Carter (2d ed. 2004), and in The Baptist Standard editorial, "Churches must act to prevent clergy sexual abuse," 4/22/2002. - (source: The voice of SNAP Baptist - stopbaptistpredators.org/alarmingnumbers.html

So probably, you poor wretch, your only alternative is to start citing LGBT sources which are always 259% reliable because they are based solely on the full truth and nothing but the truth, innit?

^ .. v ? ? ?


So now you are talking of something different? And not saying cynic philosphy is where the Church got Contemplative Life? Or that the behavior, politics, philosphies and beliefs of cynics can be applied to even the most hypocrital and evil person calling themself Catholic (much less the main body of members)?I missed the memo. Pardon.

And quote me anywhere where I have put forth that none may have personal relationship with God EXCEPT for the Pope. Or Mentioned the Pope? You started out with general exaggerated statements and I provided more details.

You can be so familiar call me silly? Because the information provided shows your examples were not quite fitting? How forward and childish.

Yes it is obvious our viewpoints disagree..but ownership of one's opinion and familiarity of the counterpoints could make things where it informs instead of disinforms. And doesn't resort to name calling?

I should read the Bible? Really? My personal Bible is here at my desk near my bed. Where is yours located? It went to Kuwait with me, Panama, Somalia and many posts. It stayed in my left cargo pocket in protective cover. I read it once a week, sometimes more when I need strength. I am not a theologian. I cannot randomly quote a passage for every occasion. As to what Christianity means to YOU? it is not necessarily how it is defined by any Church, incl RC. christianity as set forth in Bible is MORE than about charity..and it has RULES. And Christ never said to throw away the Old Testament. Quite the opposite. I read ALL the New Testament..not just select pieces. To be general and paraphrasing; Matthew's Gospel is mostly of evangelism, for Levi the tax collector who called himself later Mattai was called to convert. He worked hardest as an educated convert to convert the Jews. And the article of faith concerning the Church on Matthew's lips: "Credo in sanctum, ecclesiam catholicam-I believe in the holy, Catholic Church." It is the only gospel having the the word "church" in it and it appears twice from the lips of Jesus. "And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it." (16:18) and a Church that has the power to expel heretics from its midst (18:17). Jesus says that: "I have not come to abolish the law...but to fulfill it" (5:17). "Not everyone who says Lord, Lord will enter the kingdom of heaven. Only those who do the will of my Father" (7:21)."Whoever breaks the least of these commands and teaches others to do so, shall be called least in the kingdom of God" (5:19). (It is Paul that stressed acts of grace more and corporeal acts of mercy)

I do not think anywhere in Matthew does he say Christian "charity" trumps obedience. You may not agree with the Catholic Church as she is today. But any wrongdoing on her part does not allow for other wrongs

And guys? Isn't there ALREADY a thread to discuss the vagaries of "pedophiles" in churches? That arguement was brought up in a thread about the offcial view on traditional convervative values and stance on abortion? Really?

And what church has the most percentage? (um as compared to incidence in other positions of power over minors... schools, daycare, ozarks or Kansas?) And what about less sensationalized cases?

And one church "does it more" means what . 0_0 And the arguement itself is always brought up as a way to attack the Church in whole instead of condemming the abominable pervsions of individuals.

You are all so obsessed on that subject one would think it's a fetish! Unless the thread is about that subject it is very crass to bring it up as a foil to bolster personal opinon.

Your contradicting yourself. In case you don't understand your own posts, Daniel Burke is saying that the only valid interpretation of Scripture is the Pope's. If you have a classical education as you claim, you should be able to discern that. This is what a classical education is about, the ability to think not just mimic what you've read.

Matt 9:13: "...I desire mercy and not sacrifice..." But living a Christian life is not about Bible Quotes. It is not about wrong doing. It is about being charitable to your neighbor. My problem with the Catholic Church is that they are uncharitable, thus unchristian.

As for you... you can start living a Christian life by tipping the waitress the next time you're at the bar.

Wikipedia is only as reliable as the sources which each article has and the amount of bias which has been removed by editors who do not want to see a piece which 'proves' a certain point of view. Looking at the article you link to, I see that one of the sources given for supporting the claim that such anti-Catholicism exists is none other than Bill Donohue, famed for describing response to the Ryan Report into the decades of child abuse by RCC priests in Ireland and the subsequent cover up as "hysterical" and stating that one third of what the Ryan Report counted as sexual abuse did not "qualify as rape". And who is on record as saying "Hollywood is controlled by secular Jews who hate Christianity in general and Catholicism in particular. It's not a secret, OK? And I'm not afraid to say it." What an excellent and thoroughly impartial source.


Did you just offer us somebody from Penn State and tell us we should listen to their opinion about child abuse? Really?

Isn't it interesting that when it comes to protestants, he can't even get it down to a particular percentage, but with RCC priests he can get it down to a tenth of one percent? I wonder why his methodology was so much more accurate when it came to RCC priests. Hmm, perhaps we should have a look deeper and find a direct quote from the man himself and not just from a source which is clearly not reliable:

leaderu.com/ftissues/ft9602/opinion/opinion.html#uses


So to Jenkins the most solid assessment is a report commissioned by the RCC. Yes, that source can most certainly be trusted to be utterly impartial.


So the study which Jenkins says is the most solid assessment produces a figure of 1.8 percent but you tell us that Jenkin's own study reported that less than 1.7 percent: wouldn't that mean that Jenkin's says his study is less solid?

And what happens if we don't go with the RCC judging that in 18 cases nothing happened? What if we go with all 57? Then we get a figure of 2.5%, slap bang in the middle of Jenkin's massively accurate figure of two to three percent for protestants.

It's also interesting that Jenkins works from the assumption that all sexual abuse is reported.


Alternatively I can quote the words of somebody which your highly reliable source tries to refer to but cannot even spell the name of their star expert properly. And then I can point out the obvious problems in what he writes.

Do you believe the opposite to be true: 'Hollywood is controlled by secular Jews who love Christianity in general and Catholicism in particular'?

I believe that that is entirely off-topic and so not something I'll discuss here (do feel free to start a thread about it and I may well discuss it there).

Now perhaps you'd like to address the way in which I took your source to pieces? No comments to make about any of that? Didn't think so.

You will undermine, contest, ignore or take to pieces any sorucs that does not reinmforce, condone or justify your Church-bashing bias. Your anti-Catholic horse blinkers are fully in place and do not seem likely to become unfastened any time soon.

BTW, your'e the one who borught up Jew-cotnrolled Hollywood hating Catholics, and then you conveniently backed out since it's allegedly 'off'-topic'.

And again you refuse to address the fact that I've just shown your sources to be of exceedingly little value. Don't you have any better ones?


That conspiracy theory is on topic when using it to assess the reliance which can be placed on sources which speak about the topic of this thread. However, discussing said conspiracy theory itself here would not be on topic and we are instructed in the Posting Guidelines first and foremost "Stay on topic."

During the 1980s, the proportion of adolescents in the United States who reported having had sexual intercourse before the age of 15 began to increase. Although some recent surveys indicate that this trend may be stabilizing, the U.S. age of sexual onset has continued to decline.1 This is of concern because early initiation of sexual intercourse places adolescents, particularly females, at elevated risk of being involved in an unintended pregnancy, of acquiring HIV or another sexually transmitted disease (STD), and of other negative social and psychological outcomes.2

guttmacher.org/pubs/journals/3326801.html

Unless you dispute the fact that the age of sexual initiation has been dropping and that early initiation causes numerous heath issues as well as social and psychological problems, the question is why? Nothing just happens out of the blue. The Hairies of this world claim the media and entertainment industry are beyond reproach and have nothing to do with it. Maybe it is happening through osmosis or perhaps space aliens are telepathically implanting early-sex genes in the younger generation?

In what way is that statement related to the topic of this thread, i.e. "Bishops defend Polish family"?


a) Either quote me saying that or apologise for your lie.
b) People have been banned from this forum for deliberately mis-spelling the names of posters, I do hope that you don't join them.


More probably it is happening due to bad parenting and rubbish rock music. So let's execute all the rubbish rock musicians and the parents who failed to bring them up properly.

OK, what about a serious solution. You may have not said it outright, but you are certainly not up in arms over the garbage known as pop culture and the permissive ('anything goes') lifestyles with which society is being brainwashed and especially infects inexperienced and gullible youth. What about codes regulating socially harmful output?


This is extremely germane to this thread which started with the statement: 'The Polish Episcopate has expressed concern over the fate of the Polish family which is a victim of the social, cultural and economic crisis. It decried attacks on the family by the news and entertainment media including attempts to ignore slight or replace the complete family with civic partnerships.' The family is the prime victim of commercially fuelled permissive pansexualism and all its repercussions and consequences.

I see neither the inevitable introduction of same-sex marriage nor the rise of relationships which eschew marriage nor the falling birth rate in Poland as problems and as such there is no need for any 'solution'.


One could very easily say the same about the hate-laden fear-driven bastardisation of Christianity pumped into Polish homes by the likes of TV Trwam and Radio Maryja, the difference being that the likes of Father Director openly ask for money and specifically tell people how to live their lives.


You mean ban Radio Maryja and TV Trwam? I wouldn't support that, but they do have to follow the same laws and rules as everybody else.