Jump to content

Recommended Posts

You have missed the point I am making.


I am not standing up for the catholic church or condoning what has been done to people in its name. I was bought up catholic and went to an all boys catholic school so i know what it is like from the inside and now I do not believe in God or any religion for that matter because they are all controlling and I believe in personal freedom from any type of dogma.


What I am saying is how come it is ok to slate the catholic church but not Islam or Judaism or one particular race without being vilified by all.

Because the Catholic church isn't Christianity (though obviously it like to think it is). It's criticising an organisation, not a concept or a religion or its adherents.

It is not the same thing at all.


It's like criticising the Finsbury Park mosque for not dealing with the Islamists that almost took over there. That isn't criticing islam, it's criticising a place that permitted preaching of hatred within it's doors.


Likewise criticising the actions of Israel's government casts no aspersions on its citizens, and is most certainly not slating Judaism. In case you hadn't noticed it's a secular democracy.

The Catholic church gives a lot of support to a lot of people.

The st vincent de paul society is an example of the good that they do for the poor in the catholic community.

The majority of people within it are well meaning but unfortunately they teach people to have blind faith in God, the priesthood and the dogma. Thex are unwilling to change their teachings to deal with the modern challenges such as aids in africa and therefore there is a genuine question mark as to whether they do more harm than good.

Of course they should not get state funding for education as children are then brainwashed with their teachings and of course if taught in school then children accept it as something they should learn and accept. Children trust teachers and teachers teach them to trust priests. Schools have great power to influence children and there should therefore be no state funded religious schools. Religion should be for families to teach in the home if so inclined. And of course priests should be made an example of if they abuse their power. Im hoping long sentences are handed out to the priests of dublin, and anywhere else it arises.

womanofdulwich Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> wow Dulwich Mum- you must have had some terrible

> experience with Catholicism? You sound like one of

> those ex smokers!

> .


I thought it was just me thinking it was OTT

Thanks, Dulwichmum, for the info on that old fraud Padre Pio. Sorry if you felt offended by my mentioning De Valera, but for decades he was probably the most prominent figure keeping Ireland in cultural backwardness. It is not enough to condemn the Catholic church for its criminal acts. One needs to understand why this came about. It is sad how far some people will go to lift their own children out of poverty.

Yesterday's Guardian has a good article on abuse at boys' schools run by the Christian Brothers:

see

By the way, I am not biased against the Catholic Church. I detest all religions and all state funding of faith schools.

Long live Richard Dawkins I say.

Slightly offended about Padre Pio being an old fraud, We all have a right to express an opinion, and that is what makes the EDF so popular. However as a Catholic who grew up in the UK then moving to Italy and going to Mass on a Sunday, and praying to Padre Pio who re-enforced my faith and who I pray to when I need guidance, I take offence to the Padre Pio post.

I do not and would never belittle the faith of others, so please have the same respect. This has nothing to do with the irresponsible sickos who masked themselves as priests to satisfy the sexual urges, remember this happens everywhere not just the catholic church. so leave Padre Pio out of it please.

dulwichmum Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Yes, I apologise. I should have said;

>

> ?Thou shalt not put false gods before me...

>

> Now, where have I heard that line before?


As i said Dulwichmum we all have a right to our opinion, and I am asking you to respect those who follow their faith.

Apparently the popes themselves didn't think very highly of Padre Pio.


Aren't they supposed to be infallible? In fact wouldn't disagreeing with a pope be considered anathema?


In the light of such influential views, one can understand DM believing she had the endorsement of the highest offices of the Catholic faith?

Sure, sure, it's a bit like that denial thing. In refusing to accept criticism of Padre Pio there is the same abrogation of duty that allowed those terrible crimes to flourishin Ireland.


QED


Here's the quote...


"If anyone thus speaks, that the Roman Pontiff has only the office of inspection or direction, but not the full and supreme power of jurisdiction over the universal Church, not only in things which pertain to faith and morals, but also in those which pertain to the discipline and government of the Church spread over the whole world; or, that he possesses only the more important parts, but not the whole plenitude of this supreme power; or that this power of his is not ordinary and immediate, or over the churches altogether and individually, and over the pastors and the faithful altogether and individually: let him be anathema."

No Dulwichmum its not refusal of anything, its actually asking you to be respectful of others, who still have a belief in the faith, it is not refusal, its asking for a little respect. As I said there is no point posting on this thread, I dont enjoy coming on here because of your attacks and the lack of respect you show others, when you have a point to make.

Monica, DM has stated quite clearly why she doesn't have respect for catholicism. I don't take that to mean she disrespects you.


She is quite entitled to give her opinion though, as are you.


Mick, your point about it being current isn't valid IMO as it covers a period going back a long time. The priests are a big part of the church.

Monica, I don't know about Padre Pio. I have a mother in law who is Spanish and prays to many saints depending on what it is she would like.I don't wish to offend you or your beliefs but a prayer from the heart to whoever it is directed to will go to the right place in my opinion. I wish you well but I also understand why DM may feel so bitter. I don't think you should take it personally.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Per Cllr McAsh, as quoted above: “We are currently updating our Enforcement Policy and changes will allow for the issuing of civil penalties ranging from £175 to £300 for visible smoke emissions, replacing the previous reliance on criminal prosecution. " Is anyone au fait with the Clean Air Act 1993, and  particularly with the state of 'Smoke Control' law and practice generally?  I've just been looking  through some of it for the first time and, afaics, the civil penalties mentioned  were introduced into the Clean Air Act, at Schedule 1A, in May 2022.  So it seems that, in this particular,  it's a matter of the enforcement policy trailing well behind the legislation.  I'm not criticising that at all, but am curious.  
    • Here's the part of march46's linked-to Southwark News article pertaining to Southwark Council. "Southwark Council were also contacted for a response. "Councillor James McAsh, Cabinet Member for Clean Air, Streets & Waste said: “One of Southwark’s key priorities is to create a healthy environment for our residents. “To achieve this we closely monitor legislation and measures that influence air pollution – our entire borough apart from inland waterways is designated as a Smoke Control Area, and we also offer substantial provision for electric vehicles to promote alternative fuel travel options and our Streets for People strategy. “We as a council support the work of Mums for Lungs and recognise the health and environmental impacts of domestic solid fuel burning, particularly from wood-burning appliances. “We are currently updating our Enforcement Policy and changes will allow for the issuing of civil penalties ranging from £175 to £300 for visible smoke emissions, replacing the previous reliance on criminal prosecution.  “This work is being undertaken in collaboration with other London boroughs as part of the pan-London Wood Burning Project, which aims to harmonise enforcement approaches and share best practice across the capital.” ETA: And here's a post I made a few years ago, with tangential relevance.  https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/278140-early-morning-drone-flying/?do=findComment&comment=1493274  
    • The solicitor is also the Executor. Big mistake, but my Aunt was very old, and this was the Covid years and shortly after so impossible to intervene and get a couple of close relatives to do this.  She had no children so this is the nephews and nieces. He is a single practitioner, and most at his age would have long since retired - there is a question over his competence Two letters have already gone essentially complaining - batted off and 'amusingly' one put the blame on us. There are five on our side, all speaking to each other, and ideally would work as a single point of contact.  But he has said that this is not allowed - we've all given approval to act on each others behalf. There are five on her late husband's side, who have not engaged with us despite the suggestion to work as a team, There is one other, who get's the lion's share, the typicical 'friend', but we are long since challenging the will. I would like to put another complaint together that he has not used modern collective communication (I expect that he is incapable) which had seriously delayed the execution of the will.   I know many in their 80s very adept with smart phones so that is not an ageist comment. The house has deteriorated very badly, with cold, damp and a serious leak.  PM me if you want to see the dreadful condition that it is now in. I would also question why if the five of us are happy to work together why all of us need to confirm in writing.             The house was lived in until Feb 23, and has been allowed to get like this.
    • Isn’t a five yearly electricity safety certificate one of the things the landlord must give for a legal tenancy?
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...