Coincidentally the same percentage that are morbidly obese and couldn't pass a high school aptitude test.
moshquerade
No Lifer
- Nov 1, 2001
- 61,504
- 12
- 56
Umm, actually, the have. If you'd like to learn about the rules of the Catholic church the better book to read would be the Catechism of the Catholic Church, not the Bible.
The Baltimore Catechism has this to say:
Q. 1329. Is it a mortal sin not to hear Mass on a Sunday or a holyday of obligation?
A. It is a mortal sin not to hear Mass on a Sunday or a holyday of obligation, unless we are excused for a serious reason. They also commit a mortal sin who, having others under their charge, hinder them from hearing Mass, without a sufficient reason.
Q. 1330. What is a "serious reason" excusing one from the obligation of hearing Mass?
A A "serious reason" excusing one from the obligation of hearing Mass is any reason that makes it impossible or very difficult to attend Mass, such as severe illness, great distance from the Church, or the need of certain works that cannot be neglected or postponed.
Q. 1331. Are children obliged, under pain of mortal sin, the same as grown persons, to hear Mass on Sundays and holydays of obligation?
A. Children who have reached the use of reason are obliged under pain of mortal sin, the same as grown persons, to hear Mass on Sundays and holydays of obligation; but if they are prevented from so doing by parents, or others, then the sin falls on those who prevent them.
A Catholic doesn't sin knowing it will be okay because they can later ask for forgiveness.
I have no need to ask the Catholic church about the rules, they have been made perfectly clear to anyone who wants to know them.
Do you have any ability to reason or logically deduce?
Please explain how attending mass is a mandatory thing for Catholics to remain in the good graces of their god and to gain entrance into their theme park in the sky and then preventing this boy from being able to meet that requirement which would force him to not be able to fulfill the obligation is not denying him entrance to ride the rides at the theme park.
You might as well be arguing that heaven is in Europe and the church is providing boats and planes for all of the other members but this boy has to swim across to get in.
Really. I mean that as a blanket statement, as in every Catholic is not required to. A child who is baptized and dies at the age of 2 will never had the chance to learn about Jesus, much less understand the concept of God. The child will still get to see Heaven. Now for someone like me, it's a requirement to accept that Jesus, the Father, and the Holy Spirit make up three persons in one God. (How appropriate that last Sunday was Trinity Sunday.)
moshquerade
No Lifer
- Nov 1, 2001
- 61,504
- 12
- 56
you really are ignorant. did you read what this "boy", or we should say, man, does during mass? you can't have someone who is going to attack, injure other people, piss on the floor or be totally disruptive attend a service like this.
c'mon, you need to get real. the church is not condemning him to hell by disallowing his mass attendance either.
frostedflakes
Diamond Member
- Mar 1, 2005
- 7,925
- 1
- 81
This is all assuming the bible is interpreted literally. We all know how lax most "Christians" are in the US, and all but the most conservative Christians probably aren't going to condemn this boy to hell. It's not like he can help it.
It's amazing how someone who isn't Catholic (and evidently not religious at all) is so concerned with the beliefs of the religious, no matter how wrong he might be about what those beliefs actually are. While everyone might like to think the Catholic church has a million rules, it's probably one of the easiest to adhere to and feel secure about salvation.
It doesn't really matter if anyone condemns someone to Hell or tells you they're in Heaven, it's all up to God. My salvation doesn't depend on what others think or believe.
I think you have earned yourself a spot on my list of people I think are trolls.
Seriously, do you read ANYTHING?
You're an idiot. I equate this much to someone who does something illegal that is insane. They don't know that they are doing right or wrong. The kid didn't decide to join the religion; he probably doesn't even understand the concepts. He only goes to church because his parents do. He can't be held accountable for something he has no concept of.
I think what RightIsWrong is trying to tell us, and we all keep missing the point is:
Catholics fucking HATE kids. They REALLY hate retarted kids, and when they come across an autistic, retarted, overgrown, out of control oaf like the one in the OP's article, they have wet dreams of hate that they just can't control. If it werent for laws against child abuse and murder, they wold have down what they really wanted to do and string this kid up by the church steeple, poke him with pitch forks til they were bored, then burn him to death in a slow and painful pit of tar. Jesus, Hell Yeah!
Catholics fucking HATE kids. They REALLY hate retarted kids, and when they come across an autistic, retarted, overgrown, out of control oaf like the one in the OP's article, they have wet dreams of hate that they just can't control. If it werent for laws against child abuse and murder, they wold have down what they really wanted to do and string this kid up by the church steeple, poke him with pitch forks til they were bored, then burn him to death in a slow and painful pit of tar. Jesus, Hell Yeah!
Atomic Playboy
Lifer
- Feb 6, 2007
- 16,432
- 1
- 81
Normally I agree with you RightIsWrong, but this is just ridiculous. Let me start by addressing your claim that the autistic child is required to attend mass to get into Heaven, first from your own quote (bolded for emphasis):
As if that weren't enough, we have further quotes from the Baltimore chapter of the Roman Catholic Church (thank you markgm):
Bottom line, Catholic dogma dictates that these people are all still eligible for Heaven regardless of whether they attend church or not. Now I'd like to address some points you lay out in a different post:
1. I'll defer to the parents on this one, but it's certainly possible that the child is spitting. Regardless, even making spitting noises can be distracting in a ceremony that requires silence and reverence.
2. The parents admitted he had a problem with incontinence, so I'm guessing the urination takes place in his pants as he sits in the pew. Why else would the church even bring it up?
3. Disciplining an autistic child cannot be done in the same way as an average child, so the priest sounds like a blowhard here.
4. If the church is in a safe enough area that residents don't have to worry about their cars being stolen, then more power to them. Are you really making the claim that if someone breaks into your property, it's your fault for leaving it unlocked? That's absurd.
5. He pulled a girl into his lap. That's assault. I appreciate a good Catholic priest pedophile joke as much as anyone, but it doesn't make for a convincing argument, especially in a clear cut case of assault such as this.
6. The cry room for noisy children is where parents take children who are liable to cry. Children don't cry all the way through church, and typically the parents should be able to get them under control fairly quickly. A crying child is completely different from an autistic 13 year old who's larger than most of the parishioners and liable to get violent.
7. Just because the parents are trying to make concessions about arrival and departure times does not negate the fact that their child knocked other parishioners over. What about elderly people who want to leave early? Should they not be allowed? Or should they simply risk getting knocked over by a large autistic boy whose actions are completely unpredictable?
This child sounds too rambunctious to be allowed in public, and his large stature makes him dangerous and a serious liability to those around him. The church should have a right to prevent him from attending services if they feel it poses a reasonable risk to other worshippers, and it seems clear that it does. Let the parents educate him about the Bible at home and call that good for services for them. It's unreasonable of the parents to force others to deal with their potentially violent son just because they are misinterpreting Catholic dogma and refusing to seek special accomodations to keep their son away from other people.
The child is excused because of serious sickness. The parents are excused because of a serious obligation in charity.
As if that weren't enough, we have further quotes from the Baltimore chapter of the Roman Catholic Church (thank you markgm):
The child is excused owing to severe illness. The parents are excused owing to the need of certain works that cannot be neglected or postponed (their need to care for their autistic child).
Bottom line, Catholic dogma dictates that these people are all still eligible for Heaven regardless of whether they attend church or not. Now I'd like to address some points you lay out in a different post:
1. I'll defer to the parents on this one, but it's certainly possible that the child is spitting. Regardless, even making spitting noises can be distracting in a ceremony that requires silence and reverence.
2. The parents admitted he had a problem with incontinence, so I'm guessing the urination takes place in his pants as he sits in the pew. Why else would the church even bring it up?
3. Disciplining an autistic child cannot be done in the same way as an average child, so the priest sounds like a blowhard here.
4. If the church is in a safe enough area that residents don't have to worry about their cars being stolen, then more power to them. Are you really making the claim that if someone breaks into your property, it's your fault for leaving it unlocked? That's absurd.
5. He pulled a girl into his lap. That's assault. I appreciate a good Catholic priest pedophile joke as much as anyone, but it doesn't make for a convincing argument, especially in a clear cut case of assault such as this.
6. The cry room for noisy children is where parents take children who are liable to cry. Children don't cry all the way through church, and typically the parents should be able to get them under control fairly quickly. A crying child is completely different from an autistic 13 year old who's larger than most of the parishioners and liable to get violent.
7. Just because the parents are trying to make concessions about arrival and departure times does not negate the fact that their child knocked other parishioners over. What about elderly people who want to leave early? Should they not be allowed? Or should they simply risk getting knocked over by a large autistic boy whose actions are completely unpredictable?
This child sounds too rambunctious to be allowed in public, and his large stature makes him dangerous and a serious liability to those around him. The church should have a right to prevent him from attending services if they feel it poses a reasonable risk to other worshippers, and it seems clear that it does. Let the parents educate him about the Bible at home and call that good for services for them. It's unreasonable of the parents to force others to deal with their potentially violent son just because they are misinterpreting Catholic dogma and refusing to seek special accomodations to keep their son away from other people.
I am still torn about the title of the thread. As I explained in a PM to a mod:
The example given above is yet another instance that I see of support for my logic. It basically says that the person isn't responsible for their actions...but they are punished nonetheless under the rule of law (mental ward instead of prison most likely).
Whether or not the article explicitly stated that he will be denied entrance to heaven isn't and has not been in debate. What I have been debating is "Do the church's actions still end up causing the same outcome whether or not it was their intended effect?". In the example, the mentally handicapped person may not have intended to victimize someone, but the outcome was just that.
In the other article that I posted, other churches are setting up different programs to teach and instruct other autistic children in the reflection of their concepts of their beliefs. Some of the kids are even to the point of this child:
Maybe before calling someone and idiot, some people ought to look at themselves first and see if they are the one that is disconnected from logic and unable to see what is right in front of them.
I find it idiotic that someone is unable to see the progressive effect of the act of denying someone air and then claiming that they had no part in their death.
The problem with your "logic" as you call it is that you ignore facts - some which were clearly posted by yourself, but you act as if you didn't or they are invisible to you or something.
Yeah...nice logic. :roll:
Yeah...nice logic. :roll:
ch33zw1z
Lifer
- Nov 4, 2004
- 39,750
- 20,323
- 146
My brother works at a school for autistic children. Some of them are simply uncontrollable by any conventional means. You are correct in saying the parents can be the problem, and discussing this problem with many of the employees at this school reveals this fact...many parents have no idea what it takes, they just try to make it by. I can't even fathom what it takes to control a child like that. It doesn't change the fact that some kids are uncontrollable, autism is a strange and variant affliction, what works for one doesn't make it a rule...that is the toughest part.
AMDZen
Lifer
- Apr 15, 2004
- 12,589
- 0
- 76
Originally posted by: MrWizzard
Ummm, so you are not a atheist but you find all religions to be stupid.
Obviously you need to look up Atheism and learn what it means. Atheism is like a religion in itself. I'm also against all religions and not an atheist. Its called agnostic
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 22K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
News NVIDIA and Intel to Develop AI Infrastructure and Personal Computing Products- Started by poke01
- Replies: 397
Facebook
Twitter