Reply #122: Interesting [View All]

[JNelson6563]

I wanted to reply to what you say:

I'm sure that the defenders of the papacy around here will correct you and tell you that if anyone is LEADING in this "gang bang", it is I. But if you pay attention, you will discover that I, at least, keep insisting that my complaints are not "against Catholicism" but specifically "against the papacy" (and those who represent and/or defend the papacy". Now when the defenders of the papacy can't deny the truth of my charges, even THEY will tell you that there is a big difference between the hierarchy and "Catholicism".

It seems to me you try to infer there is a willful blindness involved in Catholicism that I charge is present in all believers. Why you feel theirs is worse than yours I do not understand.

Now if your reference to "gang banging" is supposed to shame me,

It's not to shame you, it is merely a statement of my perspective. I find it ironic and distasteful to see so many "Christians" bashing Catholicism and to see you jumping in, well it's counter-intuitive to the more positive impression I have of you genreally. It smacks of the old Catholic-hate-mongering routine that is so very old and tiresome in the rest of Christendom. So my-god-is-better-than-your-god sort of behavior with hints of self-righteousness sprinkled in.

may I ask you why a little old penniless individual like me should be ashamed to take on the leader of a billion member organization with trillions of dollars in his treasury and thousands of institutions all over the world to do his bidding, including one a stone's throw from my house????

Um, Rev? I like you a whole lot better when you aren't draggin' your cross about the board, k? Spare me the dramatic portrait of your imagined martyrdom....taking on "the leader of a billion member organization" my eye. You are joining a chorus of critical voices on Catholicism on an anonymous DB, let's not lose touch with reality here. This isn't a theology discussion afterall.

As for your claim "that ALL of religion has its problems with science," if THAT's your idea of a statement that a person with a scientific background would make, then you had better ask for a refund on your science classes. What competence do you have to pontificate about EVERY religion, and ALL science?

Oh I will spare you any pontificating, how about you share with me all the religions that have accepted the evidence of evolution for instance. Tell me all about the religions who are always adjusting doctrine to better suit the new scientific discoveries. Once those are even established as existing I suppose we could move forward. You made the initial assertion, you carry the burden.

IMHO there are THOUSANDS of scientists who don't feel there is any problem with their faith and their profession.

Yes, like those desperate souls who work tirelessly to make incredible leaps of logic to establish the Intelligent Design theory in order to make some sense of the growing piles of scientific evidence regarding evolution. It's not really evolution that way is it? Nope, they try to make science fit their beliefs. If you call that accepting, well by golly we apply different meanings to the word then friend.

Julie