nsTeam2RO, nsTeam2RW, nsTeam2_talkRO, nsTeam2_talkRW
13,254
edits
Changes
Talk:Roman Catholicism (view source)
Revision as of 05:39, October 25, 2008
, 05:39, October 25, 2008→Controversy?: My impressions
::::- ::Well, I think there is a right to a Controversy section, though the scope and depth of that scandal is ridiculous. As I said early, the Church has had scandals since the beginning. If we were to add all those as child-abuse was added, there would be no credible page left. Maybe the section deserves its own page. Trying to educate others on Roman Catholicism is not helpful with this section. It becomes, trying to educate on why to avoid Catholicism. --'''<font color="#6698FF">J</font><font color="#E41B17">p</font><font color="#F88017">a</font><font color="#347C17">t</font><font color="#A74AC7">t</font>'''<sup>[[User:Jpatt| ]]</sup> 17:25, 24 October 2008 (EDT)
::::- ::Well, I think there is a right to a Controversy section, though the scope and depth of that scandal is ridiculous. As I said early, the Church has had scandals since the beginning. If we were to add all those as child-abuse was added, there would be no credible page left. Maybe the section deserves its own page. Trying to educate others on Roman Catholicism is not helpful with this section. It becomes, trying to educate on why to avoid Catholicism. --'''<font color="#6698FF">J</font><font color="#E41B17">p</font><font color="#F88017">a</font><font color="#347C17">t</font><font color="#A74AC7">t</font>'''<sup>[[User:Jpatt| ]]</sup> 17:25, 24 October 2008 (EDT)
:::::Sound sense as ever from Jpatt. Let the section become a separate article. [[User:Bugler|Bugler]] 17:28, 24 October 2008 (EDT)
:::::Sound sense as ever from Jpatt. Let the section become a separate article. [[User:Bugler|Bugler]] 17:28, 24 October 2008 (EDT)
I've been slow to comment because I don't claim any particular expertise in this area, but my ''impressions'' are as follows:
* Much of the criticism of the Catholic church on this issue is anti-Christian beat-up. But that's not to deny that there's truth behind it.
* The Catholic church has had more instances of this sort of problem than other churches. I may be wrong here; perhaps that is due to the beat-up, but that is my impression.
* Other churches have handled the situation better. That is, if a pedophile minister is found in the Baptist or Anglican churches (for example), they take proper action, including relieving that minister of his duties. By contrast, the Catholic church has (probably more so in the past) tended to simply shift the offending priest to another parish and otherwise ignore the problem.
So on the basis of my ''impressions'' (assuming they reflect reality), I would say that the section should stay, although not be as major an issue as some (anti-Christians) would like to make it. And to point out the anti-Christian magnification of it.
[[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 01:39, 25 October 2008 (EDT)
==Requirements==
==Requirements==