Talk:Roman Catholic Church

From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Archive 1

Compliments (to R.W.) and criticisms (to R.W. and above all to this page) from a young man like many others[edit]

Hi, I discovered this Wiki just a couple of hours ago but I liked very much several articles about abortion, logic, holocaust denial and other topics! I look forward to read your articles about conspiracy theories. I'm not catholic, not even religious, but I have great respect for religious people and I found myself 'spiritual' too, in some strange way, but it's far more related with philosophy rather than with religion. Anyway, I find this page excessive and counterproductive. I mean, I don't find it offensive but sadly it's not encyclopedic and INMHO it's also kind of factious (looks a lot like the collection of selected info and sources made ​by ​right the kind of people that you try to 'unmask', and it lacks Popper's falsification), full of CONS and poor of PROS. I said 'counterproductive' because it will make go away right those american pseudo-religious right-winged white-supremacist ignorant -and surely armed- boys who should learn at lot of things from you! Don't get offence, but R.W. need to be more similar to encyclopedic style of Wikipedia (and they should learn from you about courage, original researches and menus) if you want to grow up stronger, bigger and wiser. Again, <<don't get offence at my innuendo>> and be kind with me. Bye!

- G.

— Unsigned, by: 95.238.97.220 / talk / contribs 02:17, 31 July 2014‎ (UTC)

Changing minds is a worthwhile aim. Thanks for your input, and if you feel like pointing out particular bits of text that could be improved, this talk page is the place for that. Sprocket J Cogswell (talk) 02:54, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

Major schism[edit]

how reliable is the Daily Beast? I'm looking for other sources for what's in this article. Proxima Centauri (talk) 17:44, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

Ree my edits to the section, Modern and traditional. I haven't found a source that I'm sure is impartial. Ross Douthat is a traditionalist who wants the Church to stay traditional. Other Roman Catholic authors may be playing down the threat of schism out of loyalty to the pope or the Church. Andrew Brown should be more neutral but in my opinion any recipient of Templeton money may be suspect. We don't know yet if a schism will happen but the issue is certainly worth watching. Papal authority among western Roman Catholics has been declining continually since the 1950's at least as western educational standards have risen and a western culture developed that questions authority figures. A major schism could happen now, 10 -20 years from now any time we'll have to wait and see. Proxima Centauri (talk) 14:11, 5 November 2014 (UTC)


Father John O' Connor and the Antichrist[edit]

Father John O' Connor is a Catholic Priest (He's dead now) who ran a sermon. After this, he was kicked out of the church. (this is his sermon) http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=46CC486F15DF4837

Depending on who you ask, he either exposed Homosexuality in the Church, "Masonic" Communism, the NWO Benjamin Creme, new age occult practices Federal Reserve Maitreya, Freemasonry, or the Antichrist.... Or all of these.

This site seems to be arguing about it: http://romancatholicheroes.blogspot.com/2009/03/fr-john-oconnor.html.

Question: What EXACTLY did he expose (If anything) in this sermon that got him kicked out? It can NOT be the antichrist, or the NWO, or at least VERY unlikely so due to the fact that he didn't even die until more than a decade later.... Plus wouldn't kicking him out be too obvious... but is the Catholic Chruch doing something we should be knowing about? (Besides scamming everyone who tithes I mean), or is it just another Blah Blah Blah blah homosexuality in the church, blah blah, (insert sin that "infiltrated" the church), and the Pope didn't like it so he kicked him out (I can see the pope doing that. He has a busijness to run and hypocrisy wouldn't look good for him)?--75.164.160.124 (talk) 05:00, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

Thing is, he wasn't kicked out of the church. Cursory research shows he tried to retire at 75, but Pope John Paul II asked him to stay five more years. He served as archbishop for the remainder of his life. (Have a source).
I think this is why people claim you're doing a drive-by YouTubing -- because A) You're still posting under an IP Address, which drive-by linkposters and spammers tend to do, and B) there's a rather simple explanation that two minutes on Google brings up; i.e., whoever told you that conspiracy theory was pulling your leg. Noir LeSable (talk) 06:48, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

Holy Years[edit]

As Francis-and-Benedict (being non-screaming Popes and not Francis Bacon) have declared a Holy Year (and why 2016 in particular?) should there be a mention in the article?

Do we have unholy years the rest of the time? 82.44.143.26 (talk) 18:56, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

catholic church actually explicitly embraces religious freedom, and acknowledges atheists who do good are good[edit]

the article makes a comfy claim "Like most religions, they believe that they are the only universal valid faith, and the Catholic Church teaches that it is the one true Church, to the exclusion of non-Catholic Christians"

this is below the standards of this site, isn't it :) ?

strangenotions.com, quite unsuspect of theistic brabble, is trying to shed light on the opening of minds within the Catholic church for intelligent dialogue with other faiths, inlcuding atheists:

http://www.strangenotions.com/vatican-ii-on-atheism-a-more-fruitful-dialogue/

I won't edit the main article as I don't have the tender hands needed to hit the nerve of this but the above statement is simply outdated, by >50 years now...

Comparability to Sunni Islam?[edit]

Is Catholic Church really a comparable thing to Sunni Islam in terms of numbers of adherents? I mean, the Sunni Islam isn't really an organization with leaders and hierarchy, but more an umbrella term for various smaller organizations. How exactly is the term "religious body" used in the article defined? –188.67.194.32 (talk) 18:12, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

Traditionally, Catholicism is compared with Shi'a Islam due to their mutual adoration for relics and tradition, in comparison with the Protestant/Sunni preference for sola scriptura.-- 194.81.33.234 (talk) 19:36, 9 February 2017 (UTC)
The comparison is solely based on number of adherents, not history or theology. They are different religions after all... the Sunni-Shia split happened rather early in islamic history iirc, maybe comparable to the various definitions in Christianity regarding the nature of Jesus (trinity? separate entities? created by God?) which rose in early Christianity. However, the Sunni-Shia schism is mostly based on who was the legal successor of Mohammed, which is more of a successiony type issue rather than something theological as in Christianity. I don't know about relics in islam, but if the BoN before me is right, that comparison is probably valid... however, one could also say that sunni islam has been the larger denomination since the creation of Islam and the Shias rose later which sounds more like Catholic (and maybe the other older branches, like Orthodox and Coptic) Christianity should be compared to Sunni Islam and Shias to Protestants. In the end, I don't think that one should actually compare sectarianism in Christianity with sectarianism in Islam except for when one is trying to explain what sectarianism is. The schisms had different reasons and results in those two religions.--Imaginative username (talk) 19:54, 9 February 2017 (UTC)