How far will reporters go to get a juicy story: How low will they go? How many rules will they break? How many sacred cows will they make into hamburger? Reporter Riccardo Bocca of L'Espresso is attracting worldwide attention from Catholic media outlets and bloggers. Bocca stealthily visited confessionals at 24 Catholic churches in Rome, Turin, Naples, Milan and Palermo, and lied to each priest he visited, manufacturing false confessions for various sins. He said he wanted to show the disparity between what the church teaches and what priests do. Would they conform to Catholic teaching or slip out of orthodoxy to show sympathy? Bocca found priests who would step away from orthodoxy, although not on abortion.
Fox News explained that the official Vatican newspaper, L'Osservatore Romano, was furious: "Shame! There is no other word to express our distress toward an operation that was disgusting, worthless, disrespectful and particularly offensive," the Vatican's paper said in an editorial headlined "Fake confessions in search of a shameful scoop." (Philip Pullella at Reuters also had a story.) I can't imagine even many "secular progressive" reporters finding it ethical to lie your face off in a supposedly sacred ritual.
Catholic blogger Mark Shea headlined his post From our "Take Off 50 IQ Points Whenever the Press Talks about Religion" File. His take is just as sharp as the headline:
So some jackass reporter goes around to different churches, lies about various sins and ethical conundrums in the confessional, gets 24 different pieces of advice from 24 priests and then compares them to what he calls the "official teaching" of the Church. Then he writes a "Gotcha" article which proves that priests are not computers dispensing dogmatic formulae, but shepherds who, within their varying abilities and limits, try to mercifully help struggling people do the best they can in living up the admittedly hard ideals of the Faith. Of course, he doesn't realize that's what he proves. He *thinks* he's proving that the Catholic Faith is crap, which shows what a jackass he is.
He also proves that he is a liar and a jerk, not to mention a blasphemer. I generally think it unwise to try to learn the truth about plumbing from liars, much less the truth about something weighty like a religion. I also think it unwise to try to learn the Catholic faith from people who neither understand nor believe it.
"Dishonest and despicable," said blogger Amy Welborn, linking to Mollie Z. Hemingway (an astute Lutheran) at Get Religion:
Absolution in the Christian Church was instituted by Jesus Christ. Through it, a penitent receives forgiveness of sins and strengthening of faith. In the Catholic Church, one of the elements of the sacrament of penance is that the penitent presents himself to a priest and accuses himself of sins. In Catholic teaching, it is necessary that penitents be truly sorrowful for their sins.
For Catholics, it’s not just about “telling of one’s sins.” Without sincere sorrow and a resolve to make amends, confession avails nothing, the absolution has no effect and the guilt of the sinner is greater than before.
So Bocca will have a lot to talk about with a priest should he ever desire to make an honest confession.
What’s frustrating is how irresponsibly Bocca and his paper used their power. They hoped to incite and inflame rather than edify and inform. The premise for the article was interesting and valid. The means by which the reporter researched the story were unethical and unnecessary.
Exactly. Orthodox Christians and especially Catholics would be interested in how priests and bishops would split from the Church -- in public speeches or in response to journalistic inquiries -- but not by violating the confessional seal with scummy falsehoods and even scummier reporting.
—Tim Graham is Director of Media Analysis at the Media Research Center



















Editor at Large
Comments Policy
The "news" media an
February 3, 2007 - 18:13 ET by HumanEventsThe "news" media and Hollywood want to keep making Catholicism look bad. But Islam? Why, we musn't ever use the words Islamic or muslim when doing a story about terrorism.
"Incite and inflame" is a long time staple of theirs. It was glaringly displayed when they showed that tiny portion (15 seconds) of the Rodney King incident about a billion times. Rush Limbaugh said, "The LA riots weren't caused by the Rodney King verdict but by the rioters." Very true. But had the MSM not tried to incite and inflame, perhaps the riots would have been far less.
The true Christian church is
February 3, 2007 - 18:16 ET byThe true Christian church is made up of all true believers in Christ.
And as true believers we go directly to God for forgiveness of sins. We can ask someone to pray for us, yes, but we must pray for forgiveness of our own sins and do so directly to God.
Jesus set up His church on God's Word, which is actually Him Himself, because He is the Word made flesh. Jesus is the Rock.
The Catholic church is often in the news and rarely portrayed correctly by either side of the issue, in my opinion.
I come from both a Catholic family and a Protestant one. Some may call me Protestant, but such implies that my faith came out of the Catholic church--and my faith-beliefs do not come out of it, but rather go all the way back to Christ. I believe as Peter did and Paul and Mary. They were not Protestant or Catholic either.
Perhaps this is why the MSM has such a hard time with reporting about the Catholic church, because there truly is more to it than most of them know.
John Newman (an Anglican bish
February 3, 2007 - 23:11 ET by ncstevemJohn Newman (an Anglican bishop who converted to Catholicism) correctly stated that when one becomes steeped in (church) history one ceases to be protestant.
You know not what you speak Debra--all first century Christians were Catholic. The teachings of the Catholic Church were transmitted from Christ to the apostles and will remain the same to the end of time. Christ instituted the sacrement of confession by giving the apostles the power to forgive or retain sin (Jn 20 : 22-23).
(sigh)
February 3, 2007 - 23:18 ET by Free Stinker(sigh)
ncstevem - please go read I Timothy 2:5
Let me ask you something Free
February 4, 2007 - 07:54 ET by ncstevemLet me ask you something Free.
Why do you trust the verse you site to be the inspired word of God?
If you knew your history you'd know that it was the bishops of the Roman Catholic Church working under the inspiration of the Holy Ghost who selected which texts (they considered over 100 different writings) would form the NT. They did so at the Council of Hippo (393 AD) and Carthage (397 AD).
So unless you accept the authority of the Roman Catholic bishops, you have no basis to know which 'books' should be part of the canon of the NT.
Just another inconvenient historical fact protestants choose to ignore.
What exactly is the Holy Ghos
February 4, 2007 - 09:26 ET by AtheistRepublicanWhat exactly is the Holy Ghost? I've never really understood that.
AR - Holy Ghost is just an ol
February 4, 2007 - 09:34 ET by Chicago RepublicanAR - Holy Ghost is just an older way of referring to "Holy Spirit", which is one third of the Trinity (Father, Son, Spirit). I had a german pastor years ago that referred to it as the "Father, Son, and Holy Goats."
But, what is the holy spirit?
February 4, 2007 - 09:52 ET by AtheistRepublicanBut, what is the holy spirit? The Father = God and The Son = Jesus right? So what does the holy spirit equal?
The easiest way to understand
February 4, 2007 - 09:59 ET by Chicago RepublicanThe easiest way to understand the Trinity is this way: God is not one person, God is three persons, Father, Son, and Spirit. They are each equally God, each equally share the attributes of God but each has a different function within the God head. Jesus referred to the Holy Spirit as "the Comforter". The Father is the Creator, The Son is the Redeemer, and the Holy Spirit is the Comforter.
I know I'm opening a can of worms here, but God is not One Person. God is three persons, each equally God (no pecking order, a heresy know as the Subordination Doctrine) and each having a different purpose.
I *think* I get it now. Thank
February 4, 2007 - 10:08 ET by AtheistRepublicanI *think* I get it now. Thanks, now when christians are talking about the trinity I won't feel completly ignorant. Christianity can be so confusing.
The Holy Trinity
February 4, 2007 - 14:09 ET by tumbler_2007Dear Chicago Rp,
Not "each" one person. It is ONE only God, which is revealed in the Old Testament; Yahweh; who has a unique interior life as Father, as eternal Son, and as Holy Spirit.
Three distinct Persons in One God. Think of it as metaphor (we're in the presence of an unfathomable mystery.) A HOUSE with three windows, but only ONE HOUSE.
Three windows reveal His Interior, as Father (Creator) and Son, (Redeemer and Lord) in an unbreakable union with the Spirit, who is the infinite love of the Father for His Son, --the Son's infinite love for the Father, this Love is of an infinity so profound and perfect that it has to "generate" a Third, eternal Person (Advocate for the Holy Catholic Church and all other believers ever created.) --We only have an inkling of this holy truth because God chose to reveal it to us in His Holy Son Jesus Christ.
Tumbler either you didn't rea
February 5, 2007 - 11:46 ET by Chicago RepublicanTumbler either you didn't read my post or you are misunderstanding what I said. I don't believe in 3 Gods - I believe in "God in three persons, Blessed Trinity" as the old hymn goes. Believing in three gods is polytheism, not monotheism and that is error. Nor do I believe that the Son or the Spirit are any less infinite or any less God than the Father. That is error - Subordination Doctrine. I believe in ONE God, not three.
CR - Watch out, you are now o
February 5, 2007 - 11:52 ET by fosstenCR -
Watch out, you are now on Tumblers' list. She will now say that you are a minion of the devil and that you need to repent and go to confessional or you will be damned to spend the next million years in purgatory, God bless you sir.
trust me, fossten, if Tumbler
February 5, 2007 - 11:56 ET by Chicago Republicantrust me, fossten, if Tumbler hates me and that's the worst thing that happens to me today, I'm going to be ok.
let's clarify for fosstian
February 5, 2007 - 15:53 ET by tumbler_2007No, Mr. Foss; tumbler won't say he's a minion of Satan. He will say that Chicago Republican is correct, we can believe this doctrine without question. The Catholic Church delares it, we believe it and that settles it. Furthermore he (tumbler) has no authority to damn anybody to hell or to purgatory. Only God is our Judge.
You might not even be damned to hell for all eternity for bearing false witness, preaching a false anathematized gospel (Gal 1 :8,) Foss. You might be saved if we all pray for you, and ask Our Lady to intercede for you. She is quite capable of interceding for Christians as she once did in the Bible: (John 2 :3 to :9). We are her spiritual children. Thanks be to God.
Dear Chicago Rp
February 5, 2007 - 15:40 ET by tumbler_2007Thanks for clarifying; I knew you were in the correct zone; and you've given exactly what is revealed and taught by the Catholic Church. We have it infallibly on her authority.
Uh, I may want to retract it
February 5, 2007 - 20:53 ET by Chicago RepublicanUh, I may want to retract it then...... Catholics are agreeing with me now. Back to the drawing board (sorry, Tumbler, couldn't resist).
The Holy Spirit equals 11; yo
February 5, 2007 - 11:55 ET by The Real TonyThe Holy Spirit equals 11; you have to carry the one.
LOL...sorry, my parochial school education sometimes forces me to make bad religious jokes on occasion!
Fight Terrorism at home - defeat a liberal!
very clever, tony boy
February 5, 2007 - 12:12 ET by tumbler_2007Hey-- back in the 70's-- tell me; what was a VERY holy singing act on records?
Answer: Peter Paul & Mary, .....Wish I knew the html code for writing that upside-down.
Obviously you have never noti
February 4, 2007 - 23:02 ET by NL207Obviously you have never noticed that the protestant and catholic bibles do not contain the same books. It would appear to this observer that the Protestants DID notice.
Actually, you are incorrect.
February 3, 2007 - 23:21 ET by fosstenActually, you are incorrect. The Catholic church was an offshoot and dilution of Christianity founded by the Emperor Constantine, and based on a combination of Biblical doctrines and Sun God worship.
Ever heard of Martin Luther? (No, not King)
Go read some history. And while you're at it, go read some Bible. Your understanding of scripture needs work. And cross-reference with Mark 2:7-10 and Luke 5:21-24..
dear fossten
February 3, 2007 - 23:35 ET by tumbler_2007I would caution you not to spread the conventional protestant wisdom about Christianity where devout Catholics gather. It will either lead to your gradual conversion (good) or your inevitable failure as a debater; (bad for you, good for the Catholic Church). Neither would be pleasing to our hosts in this site.
As for the Holy Bible; admit the historical certainty that it came to the world from God to His saints in the Church founded by Christ, and is certified as inspired by her Catholic Pope and bishops in council. Christ founded only one Church; never to pass away or be "REFORMED," a misnomer. Without the Catholic Church you would never have seen the Bible on earth. God bless you, Sir.
Without the Catholic Church y
February 3, 2007 - 23:42 ET by fosstenWithout the Catholic Church you would never have seen the Bible on earth.
Don't you mean John Wycliffe? Or maybe you meant William Tyndale? Or did you mean the Waldenses, who were exterminated by the Catholic church and all their records burned? Surely you don't consider the Latin Vulgate to be the inspired Word of God?
For hundreds of years, it was forbidden for anyone except Catholic priests to read the Bible.
I know much more about this subject than you do. That is not a challenge, that is a fact; nothing personal against you. However, your advice about not becoming a target is good advice. I think I'll back off for now.
please, foss, we'll agree to disagree.
February 4, 2007 - 00:07 ET by tumbler_2007This isn't the place to dispute anything like your biases. If you care to debate, my inbox is where you send messages. Under tumbler_2007
In brief, here is what I answer your challenge above posted: You know absolutely nothing, about our Bible or the True Faith. You have been misled by self-ordained men. I follow the holy apostles and Our Lord Jesus Christ. One other thing: I don't worship the Bible; I only worship God.
well said tumbler, I am imp
February 4, 2007 - 00:30 ET by Conservative Voicewell said tumbler, I am impressed.
Now I understand what everybo
February 4, 2007 - 01:43 ET by fosstenNow I understand what everybody else means when they say that you don't read posts before you respond to them. It's also clear to me why so many people on this site don't like you. I'm betting the problem isn't with me.
First of all, I clearly said I was NOT challenging you. Instead of reading that, you assumed I was challenging you.
Second, nowhere in any post did I mention worshiping the Bible. I have zero idea where you got that notion.
Third, you don't have any idea where I get my information, self-ordained or otherwise. Nor do you have any idea how much I know about this subject. That is pure, unadulterated, sophomoric, ad hominem conjecture.
Finally, your use of the word 'biases' resembles the diarrhea of the mouth that I have heard others speaking today, using the word 'bigot' and 'bigotry' loosely. It's inappropriate in its usage and in its gravity for this situation. It's actually a liberal tactic to use name-calling as an argument, and it's unprofessional and weak as a debating tool.
You started this, and I tried to be diplomatic and avoid an argument, and you still insisted on having the last word, albeit not an impressive one. I guess you don't take your own advice. So be it.
dear fossten
February 4, 2007 - 02:06 ET by tumbler_2007I really WISH you understood what everybody "means" about me and bla blah; but since you don't, we won't cover that deficiency today. I knew you hadn't meant to "challenge" me. I answered you rhetorically, expecting you to have a more sophisticated grasp of English. You took it literally, unfortunately. Much as you tend to interpret the scriptures. That is why I mentioned the worship of Bible texts and your notions of infallibility.
You have these notions, apparently. Otherwise why insist you know more than me, a well-versed Catholic ? Did we already reach a decision of what the truth is? We're not even started; and now we won't even start. I shall recall the words of Our Savior, find the passage: Matt 7, verse 6
Have a blessed Sunday, My Friend /
Since you referred to "o
February 4, 2007 - 07:24 ET by Tim GrahamSince you referred to "our hosts" on the site, I'll throw in. I am a cradle Catholic, but did not mean to start a Catholic-Sola Scriptura throwdown. All sides are welcome, even if this IS a media-bias site and I was trying to make a media-bias point. I only ask that commenters attempt to refrain from losing the Godly virtue of charity, and not assume that someone has "no" background in the Bible, or "no" grounding in history (unless, of course, someone arrives to argue that Jesus has a bloodline to the kings of France). Do you really know each other that well?
Oh, and I would love a footnote as to how I worship a Sun God.
Jesus had a bloodline to the Kings of France?
February 4, 2007 - 09:45 ET by acaiguanaJesus had a bloodline to the Kings of France?
I just love NB. I learn things every day.
:-)
ACA
...
Hillary Clinton says: "I want to take those profits."
Hi, ACA
February 4, 2007 - 16:45 ET by tumbler_2007A side note for you:
I just read the book Joan of Arc, Her story, by Regine Pernoud. Very good work; and among other wonderful things I learned about France, one is the unique nature of her monarchy, which ended when Louis XVI went to the guillotine.
It seems the reason for Joan the Maid's mission to restore to this monarchial line the throne of France is that God Himself willed it. This was revealed to her by the voices of two or three saints directly from heaven. Her work was assigned Joan in answer to the prayers of two past kings before the throne of the Almighty; on behalf of their beloved country. They were "saint" Charlemagne (I don't know how accurate his sainthood may be) and the genuine Saint Louis IX, born in 1214.
She proved her veracity by accomplishing precisely what God had commanded, then giving herself up to a tragic death; still a very young maid (virgin). But, here's the point: --God is revealed to have intended for France a mystical "marriage" between France's monarchs and their people. Succeeding kings became espoused by God to France's people, starting off with Charlemagne, the first Holy Roman Emperor.
Saint Louis IX is the king of France after whom our Missouri's city of Saint Louis is named; His title in Spanish-speaking circles is San Luis Rey, or KING. After the French Revolution the line of descent from Charlemagne became extinct, and the monarchy passed on to a nephew of Louis XVI, named Napoleon III.
Today these glories are only lamentable, seeing the tragic thing France has become. But things may one day be reversed, who knows? God works in mysterious ways. And often His will is only fulfilled after many decades or centuries in time.
um...Tumbler... My comment was a joke.
February 5, 2007 - 09:08 ET by acaiguanaum...Tumbler... My comment was a joke.
ACA
...
Hillary Clinton says: "I want to take those profits."
Humor is lost on brainwashed
February 5, 2007 - 09:19 ET by fosstenHumor is lost on brainwashed hypocrites.
My dear ACA
February 5, 2007 - 10:57 ET by tumbler_2007Come on, Cha Cha! I know you were tongue in cheeky. But having brought up French kings, it seemed a cool segue. Now you have me regretting it. Way to go, Pal.
Tim,If you tour the Vatican,
February 4, 2007 - 18:14 ET by fosstenTim,
If you tour the Vatican, they will openly describe how pagan worship was merged with Christianity.
If you examine statues of Mary holding the Baby Jesus, which Mary Catholics worship and pray to (against the Scriptures), you will see a resemblance to several pagan deities: the sun goddess Isis and her son Horus, Semiramis and Nimrod, Devka and Krishna, and Isi and Iswara. Semiramis is the mother in the statue holding her son Nimrod, who later married her, and together they exercised the ritual of offering babies as burnt sacrifices.
Semiramis had several titles, many of which have been attributed to Mary, including Mother of the Gods, Mother of God, Queen of Heaven, Madonna or My Lady, Lady of the Sea (although there is no connection between Jesus' mother Mary and the sea), and Mediatrix, to name a few.
I don't think I need to link this because the names of Mary are public knowledge that a typical Catholic should have, and the pagan goddess names can be easily obtained on google.
I'm just scratching the surface because literally dozens of books have been written on the subject, but I was trying to answer your question.
By the way, on a personal note, I think your appearances on Fox News have been excellent.
fossten has no clue
February 4, 2007 - 18:51 ET by tumbler_2007You are fomenting lies, foss. Total falsehood.
By directing another soul into false doctrine and anti-catholic propaganda you're endangering his soul. You are committing a sin.
Because you see truth in the Bible, let me point to Rome, the Holy Catholic Church in Paul's holy epistle: The very 1st chapter of his epistle to the Romans sets our Catholic Church immediately in ascendency at verse :7 --Here he writes, " . . . To all God's beloved who are in Rome, called to be SAINTS--" and v. :8, ". . . Your faith is proclaimed all over the world." and, :9 "For God is my witness, whom I serve-- How unceasingly I make mention of you, "
This is how HE saw the Church of our holy ancestors. Many hundreds of the same martyred in the days of the Caesars; now raised to the altars in that great City. I visited this city in October last year. I saw the Colloseum in which Sts Peter and Paul were martyred for Jesus Christ. I saw the catacombs into which many were laid to rest, and many of the 300 churches, each one a jewel offered up to God's glory, including several stupendous basilicas, St Peter's alone attracting millions of pilgrims every year. (And NOT A SINGLE church in which Mary is ever "worshipped". )
I cautioned you before, fossten, not to meddle in matters of faith on this site. You will be sorry for attempting to proselytize here. Our host himself, Brent Bozell, like his uncle, William F. Buckley, are devout Catholics. Measure your words, please; don't spread anti-Catholic venom here with us.
All I hear when you speak is
February 5, 2007 - 07:40 ET by fosstenAll I hear when you speak is blah blah blah...
It seems that the only thing you are attempting to do here is name-call, threaten, and bully me. And if I recall correctly, YOU are not on staff here at NB.
So far you have not offered one shred of fact to support your accusations or your assertions. Your verses are out of context, as are any set of verses you would present as so-called proof of your doctrine. All you are doing is threatening and demagoguing me. Seems awfully defensive of you; I wonder of you're afraid your bubble is going to burst.
By the way, if his beliefs are not so well-grounded that a handful of words from me can shake them, then how am I committing a sin? You are insulting Tim with your words and your condescension.
It's also interesting that you attack with impunity what you perceive as my beliefs, while warning me not to attack yours. Double standard, eh? You are a hypocrite and a liar.
As far as discussing religion, I can and will discuss it whenever I feel like, especially if others take the topic in that direction, and you and your empty, pathetic threats will have zero effect on me.
Take your ad hominem somewhere else.
Oh, that's too kind, but than
February 4, 2007 - 22:52 ET by Tim GrahamOh, that's too kind, but thank you. I understand that there may be resemblances between Christian imagery and pagan imagery -- but how hard is it to resemble a mother and a son, even when the son is God? It seems to me you're not just arguing there's a resemblance, but that the "Catholic church" founded under Constantine was invented right out of paganism. I don't want to get out my apologetics handbooks and try to refute the fundamentalist assumptions point by point.
If I seemed a little intemperate at the end of the last post, it's because it's frustrating at times to have non-Catholics suggest something went wrong in your church in 300, when many Protestants have churches (even denominations of churches) that were founded in the 1980s. Having to defend the Catholic faith is quite difficult for the typical person, since there is so much history to absorb, from the Roman Empire to the Crusades to the Inquisition and so on.
dear tim graham:
February 5, 2007 - 01:26 ET by tumbler_2007I've long experience arguing with the crusty and sunken-cheeked fundamentalist, even as long back as the 1970's. One thing you must be sure of is, none of these Christians can abide the Catholic Church. In America there's a veritable cottage industry in tracts and comics supported by protestants of the Plymouth Brethren type, bearing false witness against "Rome".
I knew one man in San Diego years ago who fancied himself filled with the Spirit, and he occupied his weekends preaching to passers-by in a San Diego public park. He was a client of mine, so we were often in contact. Of course, his first order of business was to proselytize me. I appeared gullible enough in my twenties and hispanic Catholic.
Don, (his name) made sure to palm off a couple of Jack Chick comics on me right away. If you've ever seen one, you'll know the repugnance I then felt. But he came a cropper with tumbler. Thank God.
The point is, this kind of fundie is above everything else dedicated to inciting hatred of the Catholic Church, even before entering into the task of undermining your faith and converting you. Jack Chick is one of their icons. It means more to them to combat the Church and her saints than to pray. I feel that our pal Fossent has this abnormality. I really wish it were possible to help him.
Jack Chick comics are laughab
February 5, 2007 - 07:30 ET by Tim GrahamJack Chick comics are laughably odious. I grew up in a small town in Wisconsin in the 1970s and our town was (perhaps true to the era) quite ecumenical in my experience, so I'm always taken aback a bit by harsh anti-Catholicism. In this increasingly "secular progressive" country we live in, I would ask any Christian just to join together and stand for traditional values and orthodoxy, and then perhaps debate theology once we've become friends.
I agree with that. If you
February 5, 2007 - 08:03 ET by fosstenI agree with that. If you scroll upwards, you will see how this conversation started. I was debating a person on a specific point, and Tumbler decided to leap in and vomit insults and admonitions all over me.
I am happy to discuss differences in religion without the needless threats and ad hominem attacks. I say let the arguments stand on their own merit instead of attacking the person, wouldn't you agree?
By the way, I never mentioned Jack Chick in any of my posts. But if you want to read some interesting accounts, try "50 years in the church of Rome" by Charles Chiniquy. He was a former Catholic priest, and one of the most well-respected in Canada. No scandal clung to him, and his reputation is flawless (except with the Catholic church, which he harshly criticized).
I guarantee Tumbler would be deathly afraid of that book and she will attack me accordingly.
the brutal truth about fossten
February 5, 2007 - 10:48 ET by tumbler_2007Yeah --I recall the same false preacher gave me the tract "50 years in the church of Rome" by Charles Chiniquy.
Foss: "He was a former Catholic priest, one of the most well-respected" (Catholic-bashers in Canada.) bla blah." I actually read the tripe, a so-called biography written in the 1st person. It's another stock calumny by vile fundies against the Church. The so-called convert to Bible-thumping was a renegade priest & Pope-hater. Out of the Jack Chick mold; absolutely. He defamed all Catholic priests on false grounds, something truly fiendish.
Fossten continues: "No scandal clung to him, and his reputation is flawless (except with the Catholic church, which he harshly criticized)." Actually, Chiniquity is a minion of the devil himself; having reneged on his vows (if they ever really took place, which I really can't believe) and wrote every coarse lie ever uttered by the enemies of Christ's holy Church. This book is such camp we can only feel sorry for people who read it for religious content. They're in total darkness. (I'm not surprised Fossten admires such incredible garbage; he is unmasking his morbid hatred of Catholicism plainly now.) But he still has life; he might repent and eventually return to the holy faith of his blessed ancestors.
Oh-- did I fail to mention, that Fossten is descended from Catholics? All his blessed ancestors before the so-called reformation were Catholics, faithful to the Pope and of course, Christ. This is as sure as God made little green apples. Foss's ancestors were devoted to Mary and the saints, and received the holy sacraments. He's never realized this fact, I suppose. -- Not a challenge, Fosston-- FACT.
You have definitely stepped i
February 5, 2007 - 11:41 ET by fosstenYou have definitely stepped in it this time Tumbler. It is undoubtedly clear to anyone else reading this thread that you couldn't possibly know anything about me, since you don't know me. Your unabashed assertions show that you are nothing but an absolute insane wacko spouting ad hominem attacks.
But hey, congratulations, you are doing a better job of discrediting Catholics than I could ever do. Anybody who reads your insane ramblings must be thinking twice at this point about the veracity of your statements.
You don't deserve to be on this site. You dissolve into personal attacks on a level with the most rabid hater liberals I have ever debated on any forum. You would be better off on DU or Huffingtonpost, since there you don't have to actually present facts, but can get away with demagoguery.
By the way, you clearly spoke falsely just now. 50 years in the church of Rome isn't a tract - it's a BOOK. Figures you wouldn't know the difference, you are lying about it being given to you, and you obviously never bothered to read it. You are so afraid you might be wrong that you are lashing out. I understand. It is with pity that I write these words to you.
Another falsehood is the "out of the Jack Chick mold" comment. How can person A be out of Person B's mold if Person B wasn't born yet? Hmm? I guess you didn't bother to check those facts, did you? That's like saying that James Madison was out of the Bill Clinton mold, absolutely.
your friend tumbler
February 5, 2007 - 12:02 ET by tumbler_2007Yes, fosstus-- I hear you.
I read the Chiniquy garbage in tract form, a pamphlet about 30 pages, small type. I saw it once again online, the entire piece of crap. It really is a repulsive story, and I have NO DOUBT it's fiction from top to bottom. BTW; a mold can be used repeatedly over many years, I know. I work in ceramics.
Ironic indeed, you call me insane rambler, insane wacko, liar, and demagogue; while you're a smiling, tolerant, kind Christian "debater". Only, Sir: You gave yourself away, never admitting any connection to Jack Chick ("I never mentioned him in any post here) and then sand-bagging the Catholic faith with that spurious and disgusting hate literature from Chiniquy's Inferno. A hit-piece if there ever was one and you DARE mention it in a debate of the true faith.
FYI, I've debated at huffybarnyard and in FAVOR of God and morals. I never "lash out," I really speak from convictions. Up above I warned you not to be contentious because you'd be sorry. Now you've found it out. I suggest you drop this correspondence while you're Hmm-mmm--"ahead". Pay attention this time.
"Debate of the true fait
February 5, 2007 - 12:32 ET by fossten"Debate of the true faith?"
Don't make me laugh. You have failed, Thumbelina. Failed to debate one ounce of the subject. You don't desire to debate. You desire to suppress, a la Al Gore, Hillary Clinton, and all the other Stalinists in the world. Your best argument has been a personal attack. If I thought you really wanted to debate, I would continue this conversation. But that is not going to happen because all you have succeeded in doing is calling names and attacking me.
I don't have any more time to waste on you. I'm finished casting my pearls before swine.
Oh, my!!! His pearls ! ! !
February 5, 2007 - 12:42 ET by tumbler_2007I want a pearl, I want a pearl !!!! Waaa; he took his pearls and went home! Hahaha!
one little detail for fundie
February 5, 2007 - 20:54 ET by tumbler_2007There's just one thing more for you foss,
I'm an elderly man. I noticed how you were trying to bait me, calling me "she" for sarcastic value. You must be disappointed my manhood kept its poise during your failed attempt to diminish it. (It's my advanced age, Preacher, read about Abraham, the elderly patriarch. Men advance in wisdom when God is pleased with their ways.)
It is, however a glaring sign of your insecurity in this dispute. I THOUGHT your posts were seeming very "high-pitched". (God has ways of disarming such buffoons.)
Okay.Jesus is God.Mary is the
February 5, 2007 - 13:14 ET by Michael ChapmanOkay.
Jesus is God.
Mary is the Mother of Jesus.
Therefore, Mary is the Mother of God.
(God's Will is Perfect.)
Turnabout is fair play
February 3, 2007 - 18:17 ET by nkviking75I wonder what we'd see if someone followed Bocca around and reported his ethical lapses with employers, sources, police, the Italian equivalent of the IRS, or even his significant other.
Religion
February 3, 2007 - 18:46 ET by Jerry MackAnother attack on Religion. The Sps will never give up.
Rome (AP) -- The headless bod
February 3, 2007 - 18:57 ET by Roger the ShrubberRome (AP) -- The headless body of Riccardo Bocca was found in the Po River overnight. The journalist for L'Espresso was, according to a press release from the newspaper, doing research on how different mosques practiced and followed the teachings of Islam.
When asked for a comment, The League of Muslim Brotherhood and Peace of Italy reply was "though we regret the unfortunate accident of the infidel, it is clearly the work of Zionist America and George Bush".
Proper term
February 3, 2007 - 19:44 ET by reelman46The modern liberal is a secular socialist, even Bill O fell into the trap of using the deceptive term the liberals desire ... they vote as secular socialists.. there is nothing "progressive" about socialism... we conservatives should never ever use SP terms! Join me in that effort...
(yes, I am a Catholic school 12 year grad and more but I just had to say this)
One Church was founded 9 years after the crucification...in Rome by the apostles... I taught cmty college when an aggressive Baptist started going on about how there was a separate group of christians from the Catholic church founding time (42a.d. in texts)... so I got the public college World History text... no such thing. After 1,500 years groups started breaking away. Live life as you wish but history should not be altered as in a communist elementary school with its new fresh doctored history texts. I also had some grad school history courses in the 1970s and they also confirmed the above... may we all meet one day in a better place.
hi, reelman
February 4, 2007 - 00:25 ET by tumbler_2007In pt of fact, Christ founded the Church Himself, giving her the holy priesthood forever at his Last Supper; where He instituted the Holy Eucharist in anticipation of His Passion, Death & Resurrection. The apostles were sent to the nations by Our Lord; after being confirmed on Pentecost, approx 33 AD, by the Holy Spirit, they commenced immediately to preach the Gospel. Peter himself converted about 3,000 people on that very afternoon.
This is to say, the Church of Jesus which is His Bride; our own Catholic Church-- goes back to that Pentecost; and as Christ promised her, has never passed away. He promised to be with her to the end of the world. He gave His apostle Peter primacy over all His fold, together with the other bishops (shepherds)-- and Peter's lineal successor today is the Pope in Rome.
So some jackass reporter go
February 4, 2007 - 07:26 ET by motherbeltSo some jackass reporter goes around to different churches, lies about various sins and ethical conundrums in the confessional, gets 24 different pieces of advice from 24 priests and then compares them to what he calls the "official teaching" of the Church. Then he writes a "Gotcha" article which proves that priests are not computers dispensing dogmatic formulae, but shepherds who, within their varying abilities and limits, try to mercifully help struggling people do the best they can in living up the admittedly hard ideals of the Faith. Of course, he doesn't realize that's what he proves. He *thinks* he's proving that the Catholic Faith is crap, which shows what a jackass he is.
This is from Catholic blogger Mark Shea, included in the original post. I agree wholeheartedly. Priests are, above all, human, and entrusted with a great responsiblitiy: to guide penitents back to the right path. Do they fail sometimes? Of course.
This thread proves that it's not wise to argue about religion. Observe how quickly it degenerated from a discussion of the original topic into personal attacks on others' beliefs and/or intelligence.
dear mother of all belts (smile)
February 4, 2007 - 14:26 ET by tumbler_2007It's never wise to argue at all; we should discuss and give the Holy Spirit leeway to enlighten the proud, confuse the unbeliever, and bring us together in communion.
This only degenerates into controversy and anger if you argue something you haven't the preparation for. When you "argue" from strength you're doing what St John the Baptist did daily. He rebuked the unholy and called the sinner to repentence. He was accustomed to using ad hominem attacks with great verve. "Brood of vipers!" for instance. There's a time and a place even for ad hominems; if you're on the side of truth.
Jesus also was moved by the Spirit to address certain men as "whitewashed tombs; beautiful on the outside and on the inside full of dead mens' bones." That seems awfully graphic, don't you think?
I see you still don't take yo
February 5, 2007 - 09:17 ET by fosstenI see you still don't take your advice. Here you are saying it's not wise to argue at all, yet you see fit to use ad hominem attacks on me.
You are a first-class hypocrite; no different than the liberals I debate every day.
thank you, Thank you, THANK YOU
February 5, 2007 - 11:15 ET by tumbler_2007How very kind of ya, Foss.
Looks like you grade an opponent gangster style; the one you can't destroy you verbally abuse. That takes less talent, actually. You're probably more talented with a knife.