Freespirit1983 wrote:
That’s untrue. The Catholic Church has a lower rate of abuse than public school do.
Ernie Allen, the president of the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children stated, “we don’t see the Catholic Church as a hotbed of this [sexual abuse and pedophilia] or as a place that has a bigger problem [with this issue] than anyone else.”
I thought Roman Catholics were supposed to believe in moral absolutes. But it seems that the standard for sexually violating children is “it’s no bigger problem a problem with this issue than anyone else.” That’s a pretty low bar.
Hey come to the Catholic Church.
Why?
Cuz we’re no worse than anybody else.
Right but you know better either.
I’m sure I must be getting this wrong. That can’t be what you’re saying.
The point is there will always be moral failings by humans.
The Church is a hospital for sinners and not a museum for saints.
Don’t leave Jesus because of Judas.
The standard that the “hospital” no worse than any place else, begs the question whether anyone’s getting better in it. After all some are getting better without it. If anyone is getting better within the “hospital” (the saints?) it might be in spite of it instead of because of it.
The Church has produced thousands of saints. One proof of the truth of the Church is that those that live the faith become holy saints.
Prove it.
I did?
What, with a list of names and hagiography? That’s the clergy preaching to the faithful. How do you suppose that would persuade anyone else?
My point is that people that LIVE Church doctrine become saints.
_
Catholicism… the scapegoat for others’ pedophillic sins.
Humanity has always disgusted me, in shifting all blame to others, without realising the catastrophic consequences that will ensue.
That’s a proposition not a proof. From the outside it looks like the Roman Catholic Church validating itself. Prove that’s not all it is.
I can’t 
This is part of the way skunks seem better than humans.
But if a skunk had a bigger brain and special DNA, i think they could out do humanity fast.
We can at least accept the stories of the saints as myths and legends that capture in narration the moral vision of the archetypal pattern and ideal of the Roman Catholic Church. The RCC is said to have documented cases in the tradition of Roman law. So I would expect RCC apologists to claim more. What can person with an open mind do but examine the evidence for their claims?
Meanwhile I’m happy to interpret the stories as myth and legend and suspend judgment about the historicity of the stories.
I like the one about Joseph the flying saint. Have you read about it?
I like the stories about the cephalophores, saints who got their heads cut off. It seems in depicting them artists couldn’t decide whether to put the halo around the head that the saint was carrying, or the halo around the top of the neck, where the head used to be.
Felix,
I have.
Here are some scientifically validated Catholic miracles.
What about Saint Christopher? According to the stories he was a giant with the head of a dog.
According to CG Jung, Fatima was evidence of the recurrence of the divine feminine archetype in the person of Mary the mother of Jesus.
Interesting.
Was he an atheist? I couldn’t figure it out.