Scandals, conflicts, tensions, arguments - real life examples from Poland

Why "again"? Could you explain?

And, no, I'm just making fun of Ironside's views.


The death of a parent doesn't affect kids in any way? Really? Links?


Like becoming priests who don't follow celibacy? ;D


Yup.

Disingenous.... and I'm talking about longterm outcomes. There the data is pretty clear. Children of mothers who are single by choice or fecklessness have worse longer term outcomes (criminality, education, employment, dysfunctional relationship patterns) than do children of single, widowed parents.

How is that "disingenous"? You made a claim and I'm asking you to prove it with links (research).


Then provide link to that data.


And what about children of mothers who aren't single "by choice or fecklessness" or due to becoming a widow, but due to their fathers dumping their family?


I'm guessing the same can be said about children from "whole", but pathological/dysfunctional families. I'm afraid that if priests were to be chosen only from perfect families the list of candidates who'd be allowed would grow very thin ;) There aren't many willing already as it is...

By "affect" I mean their psychological health and the resulting longterm outcomes that you mentioned. I'm asking because I had a classmate at highschool who lost both of her parents and she had to be on antidepressants all the time. She complained that they made her sleepy and "slow" (she meant thinking, learning). Of course, it's not the same as losing one parent, but still...

You are not qualified to make fun of my views. First of all, you are a fool, not my equal.

Are you talking to a mirror again, Ironside?

Just because she doesn't like you doesn't make her a fool.

I respect her for calling me names so much that I would buy her a dinner if I could.

I am sure we would have a very lively conversation...

Cause you're too intellectually lazy to do the work yourself?

Do the searching the data is out there.

Can you seriously say that with a straight face? She is the least lazy of the posters here, usually providing multiple sources to back up her posts.

And if you claim something you should be able to back it up.

It will mean more to her if she finds it herself.

Are you trying to be witty again, Lenka? It's fallen flat like always.
--

You are another one who doesn't qualify to be my equal. Your post proves without doubt. She can dislike me, no problem, but being a stuck-up fool is another matter. I have been tolerating it for a long time just because she is a woman, and you would expect less from a woman, but enough is enough. A delusional idiot like her doesn't understand most of the arguments and has the cheek to make condescending posts. What a joke.
Memo to Novichoc:
Hey, if you do not have dementia, you should pretend to have one; people would tolerate your BS more.

What prejudiced, unscientific crap you are peddling? It is not based on statistics but on your idiocy. Have you ever worked part-time in prostitution? There, you can find a dump specimen like you.
--

Do you mean orthodox or Orthodox?
--

Your delusional crap is useless to everyone. I'm saying, based on years of your posting, that it is very possible you wouldn't be able to distinguish between gold and **** if served in a nice package. It is not a mere opinion; it is an educated guess.
---

What proof do you expect?
An epiphany delivered straight into your head? Let's be honest here, no matter what source I post, you would find a flaw in them, because you don't care about facts, you believe in what you like to believe, as it makes you feel better.
As the saying goes, if you want to drink from a spring, you need to kneel.
--

I suppose that passes in your world of dummies for an argument? lol!

Said by someone who spend half of his post offending his interlocutor and the other half explaining why he can't back up his statement...

I mean Orthodox.

I've heard/read many times from Orthodox priests, that if all the followers disappear - the Church will still be just fine. One day it will come back to life anyway.

But if it corrupts itself, bends this way and that, then such a Church will disappear from the Earth, because in the end - its power is Truth, and Truth cannot be changing.

I always thought this position was hilarious. A Church so proud of its traditions, that it doesn't care if it has any believers left.

It's not a new position either. In the 3-4th centuries some of the Patristic texts were already voicing this strange position.

-//-

So when you said - "If there are no good priests, then there should be no priests" - I laughed.

I think someone who's been as long as you on PF knows the answer to this question - probably even those who dislike me do.

What is going on with you, maf?


No, it won't. It does matter to me though if you respect me enough to provide sources for your claims when I'm asking you for it, because this is what I'm always trying to do myself when I'm discussing with others. So it's actually fair of me to expect that from people I'm discussing with.


Sorry, but we women have enough of doing work for lazy men :))) You make the claim, you provide the proof - that's the most basic rule. I'm not going to waste my time and do your job for you. Until then I'm just going to assume you're talking out of your ass.


And that's one of the reasons I'm not writing on regular basis on PF anymore. It takes too much time for me. It's quick and easy for trolls and psychos here to spout nonsense and lies, but in order to refute all their crap I have to do research, usually read multiple sources, choose the most credible and reliable ones and often make some summary and write the more important stuff in bold, because I know they most probably won't read what's in the link and pretend they "missed" my comments, so I have to throw it in their faces.

And unlike some of them and mafketis I'm writing in a foreign lanuague which means checking spelling and making sure there are no serious mistakes in my posts.

So, no, considering all the work I've been doing on this forum and how much time I wasted here I'm not going to do other people's job on here on principle. No f*cking way.

I would prefer to eat a dinner at your house in order to check if your wife is real/OK lol I conversed with you enough already, so I'd have some serious questions for her. Of course, I'd have some serious questions for you too, but I doubt you'd answer them honestly or at all.


Now that's what I call "a joke" ;D You literally made me laugh out loud. 😂😂😂🤦


Of course not, just like the nonsense that you posted about homosexuals in this thread isn't based on anything but your prejudices :)))


Just like that article about the history of tattoos in Europe that I posted recently? :) I myself found it to be very interesting and educational. 🤔


Research, data, statistics. You haven't posted any.

For example, earlier on this thread I wrote that according to research majority of Polish priests don't follow celibacy. Here's the link:

natemat.pl/25743,60-proc-ksiezy-jest-w-zwiazkach-z-kobietami-prof-baniak-autor-badania-prawdziwa-skala-jest-jeszcze-wieksza

You see? This is how it works in a discussion among normal adults. You make a claim, you provide a link.

slate.com/human-interest/2012/07/single-motherhood-worse-for-children.html

that references several studies (links to some are dead but possibly traceable)

this link is still live: pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC2764264/

amazon.com/Growing-Up-Single-Parent-Hurts/dp/0674364082

I'll look up some more in the coming days...

Nuvver one!

"Single Mother Parenting and Adolescent Psychopathology"

pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5226056/

Well, I think like this: It may be seen as an unrealistic or even naive position for some who don't believe. I assume that Providence would send individuals to be good priests. If not, the fault lies with the people, unworthy scum.

In short, there is nothing to worry about if we stick to the standards.
--

That is typical female nonsense. You don't address the issue nor talk about arguments, you start getting personal - oh, you are mean.
Look, if you are looking for niceties, you should look somewhere else. The PF is not about niceties that clearly enough.
---

No, it is based on data that is out there. Check the statistics of domestic abuse in female couples and compare them with the statistics on normal couples. If you can think, you will come back here and apologize to me.
---

Even if they don't - so what? I mean, first of all, Alleged research that statesthe real scale is greater reeks of being a propagandistic piece, not academic research. If we assume for the sake of discussion that they are right, so what? You don't care about the Church, nor do you care about its teachings. Why do you care about the sex life or sexless life of some men? Are you a prevert?
--

Said after you said this:

Or this:

It's truly laughable. You are one big whimp.

It is a mystery of the female brain how you arrived at such a conclusion.
- On average, prostitutes are dumb like F, hence my reflection.
-you are a fool, not my equal That is not intended as an insult; it is simply a statement of the truth.
All you understood was - you are mean, and when I pointed it out, you are a wimp.
You are a typical female intellectual, lol! Keep it coming.

@mafketis, thanks for the links, I'll check them out when I have more time.


It matters because they're breaking a vow given to God and yet they lecture non-clergy Catholics on keeping their vows (marital vows) and punish them for "breaking" them (divorce) by denying them the Holy Communion while the priests breaking their own vow have access to it all the time. That's hypocrisy.


Then post them :)


I don't have the time to check how many studies have been done concerning this (apparently not many) - I had a quick look at Wikipedia and judging by that both in case of gay and lesbian couples the difference with heterosexual couples isn't that big. Additionally, in case of lesbians a third of them experienced that domestic violence from at least one male perpetrator so that study is a bit confusing.

Either way, what does it have to do with gay priests who are all males? Is there a study out there showing that gays make worse priests? Does it show gay priests being less likely to observe celibacy and more likely to display pathological behaviour?

Btw, at the end of the secondary school we were signing each others' souvenir books with our classmates and one of the boys from my class who was an altar boy in our church wrote in mine: "I want to be a priest like my father" lol So it clearly has been a running joke for years...

Another scandal of lesser degree :) but also touching upon hypocrisy:

So there's this Polish, apparently popular, controversial, right-wing influencer who has over 100 000 followers (among them Polish members of parliament, Deputy Speaker of the Sejm, TV Republika reporters) called Papjeż pOlak. In his posts he's been sh1tting on women with tattoos, on women over 30, on single mothers, on men who get into relationships with single mothers, etc. But it turned out that his current girlfriend is OF COURSE NO OTHER but a single mother over 30 with tattoos and piercing and a sh1tstorm on the internet has ensued, hahahaha :D :D :D:

donald.pl/artykuly/ahPUf9cF/zwiazek-prawicowych-influencerow-wstrzasnal-konserwatywnym-internetem-padly-oskarzenia-o-zdrade

Of course the comments on the social media are like:

"Rightwingers being hypocritical? News to me."

😂

That is their job. What is your issue? What matters is whether they are good at their job or not. You don't ask a car mechanic about the state of his own car and so on. As long as he is doing a good job on your car, that is all you care about. Suddenly, you mind if a priest does his job? Let me tell you, anyone who has a problem with a priest talking about sin, dogma, and so on is, at best, misguided and likely a full-time fool. I ask you, what do you care?
----

It's a long-winded and convoluted way of saying that some people with a certain worldview are hypocrites. I can agree that some people, regardless of their views, might be hypocritical, and all of us can be hypocrites at times. Your statement, of course, is nonsense, as are many of your conclusions.

What's funny is that you claim to be an open and tolerant person, willing to consider all points of view. You phrase it better, but I have no time to waste on phrasing it the same way left-wing people do.

At the same time, you brush all kinds of people with the same broad stroke simply because they are not left-wing. If that isn't hypocrisy, then what is? What do you have to say about that?

A nonsensical comparison. A priest isn't a car mechanic, he is a kind of "public trust figure". Just like politicians, police officers, etc. - we expect certain moral standards from them. Priests are even more than that - they're "Christ's witnesses", heirs to Apostles and they should lead by example. Not just by words, but by deeds. People listened to Jesus because, apparently, he lived by what he preached.

"Thus, by their fruit you will recognize them. "Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. Many will say to me on that day, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name and in your name drive out demons and in your name perform many miracles?' Then I will tell them plainly, ,'I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!' "Therefore everyone who hears these words of mine and puts them into practice is like a wise man who built his house on the rock. The rain came down, the streams rose, and the winds blew and beat against that house; yet it did not fall, because it had its foundation on the rock. But everyone who hears these words of mine and does not put them into practice is like a foolish man who built his house on sand. The rain came down, the streams rose, and the winds blew and beat against that house, and it fell with a great crash." When Jesus had finished saying these things, the crowds were amazed at his teaching, because he taught as one who had authority, and not as their teachers of the law."

Matthew 7:20-29


I definitely used to be like that, but not as much anymore as in the past. I guess you're not up to date :)))


Consider - yes, accept - not necessarily *shrugs*


That's not my statement, but my translation of a sarcastic comment from the internet:

• 
  hypocrisy.jpg
  

You posted it for some reason, and I guess rather because you agree with it, not disagree.
However, the crux of the matter is that the post you agreed with was hypocritical in itself.
----

They should, but they are not saints. Even if they fail in their duty to lead by example, they can and should still do their job. I dislike simpletons' views on what constitutes leadership, priesthood, and all matters concerning them.

Yes, it is also my observation that hypocrisy is very common among rightwingers.


How so?


They should strive for sainthood though. All Christians should, but "shepherds of the flock" - even more so.


You contradict yourself then. You wrote the opposite before.


Your "dislikes" aren't that important though. What does matter is the reality. And the reality is that people won't follow hypocrites. That's the crux of the matter. If the Church will be building its walls on sand (bad priests), instead of on a rock (good priests who lead by example), it will keep crumbling.

geez, didn't I say it before? You let me look down on you because you are slow, and then you claim that I do not treat you right.
Because claiming that people with similar political views are 'something or other' is pure prejudice. For those on the left who claim to love humanity, being tolerant and open to all kinds of different views, to say those who do not support left-wing or centrist ( as defined by us) are bad is contradictory to all those assumed left-wing virtues. In fact, it is hypocrisy. Do you understand now?
---

They are humans thought. Do not expect from others more than you expect from yourself.
--

Not really, it depends on what we are discussing. Are we talking about sins such as fornicating, drinking, or gambling, or are we addressing more serious crimes like child abuse? These are different degrees of transgression, and one could be forgiven while the other may not be.
--

Not hypocrites but weak human beings. They are needed too, as they provide a background for the good priests to shine. People shouldn't follow priests; they should follow the teachings of God.

As I wrote - you're not too bright :))) The fact that I'm asking questions doesn't make me "slow" :)))) It means I have a reason to ask that question. The fact that you don't know that reason doesn't mean I'm stupid :)))


We don't know that woman's views though and if she claims to be "tolerant and open". Besides, it isn't about being open to different views, but whether people who profess those views actually live by them. And my observation is that right-wingers often don't but they eagerly judge and condemn others.


I don't.


Well then, the Church has been very forgiving towards those more serious crimes too for years and that's a (very serious) problem. I'd say that's the darkest stain on the Church's robe.


Yes, hypocrites. Waging wars against "LGBT propaganda", making people hate gays, being against sex or health education at school, but at the same time moving literal rapist peadophiles, sex and drug addicts from parish to parish, sweeping the Church's sins under the rug is hypocrisy. And simply stupid.

Gays are like smokers...they hate other gays because they, gays, know that they are tolerable only if their numbers are low.

Ah, and to continue on the topic of male right-wing hypocrisy - this Papjeż pOlak in his posts was also sh1tting on "fat women" while he himself looks like this :):




Are you talking about yourself here??? :D