 |
|
Atheists have been adept at
bolstering their numbers by attempting to affix
themselves to non-religious categories of poll studies.
For example; a statistical study of major religions of
the world ranked by the number of adherents, sets non-religious at about 16% worldwide
(1). The
polls establishes that half of that segment are simply non-practicing, while the remaining 8% are comprised of
agnostic, atheist, secular humanists, as well as no
specific religious
preference, "atheists are a small
subset of this grouping". Where an atheist might
endeavor to lead others to consider their category to be
16% - 18% of the general population, it is more
realistically about 3% - 4%. Via several analogous
poll studies, it is evident that a only a fraction of that figure represents those who
truly believe that there cannot be a Supreme Creator
- coupled with the belief that
there is no life after death.
|
|
There appear to be two
rudimentary classifications of nonbelievers, for lack of
conventional designations, we have referred to these groups as
"Contrived Atheists" and "Veritable Atheists". Before debating, it
would be helpful to ascertain which category the contender
represents. Most will fall into the "Contrived Atheist"
classification. These atheists will appear to have an entrenched
hostility towards one, several or all religions (in which they
endeavor to mask or conceal). They
characteristically exhibit an apparent abhorrence towards God in general,
likely resulting from something troublesome that happened in their
lives, which they attributed to God. It is difficult to consider
these people genuine atheists, particularly due to the
perplexity of being angry at something they proclaim not to exist.
Arguing with this form of atheist will likely digress into trading
"one liners" or "barbs of pointed
witticisms", with diminutive results. They can remind you of the
typical axioms; "going in one ear and out the other" or "spinning
your wheels". As, these nonbelievers may only be "jerking
your chain" or "trying to get a rise out of you".
They are very similar
to those who argue that NASA never landed on the moon in the late
60''s and early 70's. Whether the evidence be communication
records, Moon rock samples, photographs, retro-reflectors left on the
lunar surface, testimony, video, etc., all
evidence is completely ignored. "Veritable Atheists" appear to
be a smaller category and seem to take a more level-headed scientific approach. They have
a genuine interest in objective systematic discussion with reason.
Arguing with
these people will seem to be more of a logical discussion than a debate. When debating with an atheist, it becomes
apparent that they do have some legitimate contentions, particularly with
Catholics. Likewise, we do have some very questionable actions
in our history that can be awkward to defend.
It is a foregone conclusion that atheists will gravitate towards
these tough topics. Regretfully, this has lead some Catholics
to become perceptibly uncharitable while debating. Debating with a
knowledgeable atheist can certainly become arduous, as all the
skeletons will be dragged out of the closet. Subsequently, it
would be prudent to become acquainted with certain targeted segments
of history, particularly regarding events in the past that can be most vulnerable. For
example, centuries ago, the Catholic Church adopted the
celestial sphere orbs theory developed by Aristotle. In these
celestial models, the stars and planets are carried around by being
embedded in rotating crystal spheres moving around the Earth.
Giordano Bruno was burned at the stake by the Church for
heresy (February 17, 1600) and his writings
forbidden because he believed in the Copernican Heliocentrism theory
by Nicolaus Copernicus, which held that the Earth was spherical and
orbited the Sun. A statue of Bruno was constructed in 1889 at
the site where Bruno was burnt, which
eventually became a place of annual commemoration
by atheists (2,
3). Oddly, some Catholics
opted to sanction the burning of Bruno in several debate
discussions, citing unsupported anti-religious claims that were
likely fabricated to justify and seal the execution. "Cardinal
Angelo Sodano declared Bruno's death to be a "sad episode". Despite
his regret, he defended Bruno's persecutors, maintaining that the
Inquisitors "had the desire to preserve freedom and promote the
common good and did everything possible to save his life" by trying
to make him recant (4).
The quandary of Sodano's contrite
account is that the Earth actually
is spherical and does orbit the sun. Giordano Bruno’s
jaw was clamped shut with an iron gag that pierced his tongue
with iron spikes. He was then paraded through the streets of Rome,
stripped of his clothes and burned at the stake wearing the tongue
piercing gag. Notwithstanding that Jesus told several self
righteous Pharisees attempting to execute a woman caught in the
act of adultery: "Let
he who is without sin cast the first stone"
(John 8:01). How did the Church digress so far from
Scripture?
The next
Copernican target was the famous astronomer Galileo
Galilei, who was threatened to be burned at the stake
and shown the torture devices (including the recovered tongue piercing gag) used on Giordano Bruno. He was
compelled to sign a document supporting the celestial sphere theory
and denouncing the Heliocentrism theory. Many of these
fanatical behaviors may be attributed to the resulting countless Christian
splinter groups who eventually chose to gaff themselves off from the Apostolic Successorship of the Holy Roman Catholic Church. It is
also likely that several of these actions
alienated other people who chose to abandon the Christian faith, and quite
possibly any faith altogether. In September of 1999, one
of the greatest and most loved Popes, John Paul II, took the noble
action of issuing a formal apology for all the mistakes committed by
some Catholics in the last 2,000 years of the Church's history,
including the trial of Galileo (5,
6).
The pedophile priest scandal frequently becomes a poignant target. Adept
atheists are well aware of the of the infamous 1962 Secret Vatican
directive authored by Cardinal Alfredo Ottaviani (then head of the
Holy Office) which mandated the excommunication of children
victimized by pedophile priests in the event they sought help from
authorities, (as uncovered by CBS News in 2003). Atheists
articulated compelling arguments that this document
was specifically drafted to nurture pedophiles priests and provide
them with sanctuary within the Catholic Church (7,
8,
9). As soon as CBS
News uncovered the 1962 Ottaviani mandate, the Catholic Church
swung into damage control, endeavoring to minimize the directive’s
role and significance. It would be wise to read this document very
carefully, as defenders of this mandate claimed the secrecy is only
to maintain the sanctity of the Confessional. The directive clearly broadens the range and scope to before, after
and outside the Confessional on the very first page. The victimized
children needed only to make one confession in their lifetime to be
subject to the adroit legal phrasing. Defensive articles attempting to diminish
the significance of this Ottaviani directive claim that it does not
bar the child victims from making separate charges about the
priest's sexual misconduct. On the contrary, atheists pointed out
that in the event the
injured party declined absolute secrecy (sought protection and/or
justice from the authorities), the directive clearly mandates the
molester victims be excommunicated from the Roman Catholic Church
for life. The Ottaviani directive makes this unmistakably
crystal clear throughout the document (10,
11).
This mandate was sent to every
Bishop in the world. We observed one irate Catholic woman
challenging a contending atheist: "Show me evidence of even one
child that was excommunicated for going to the authorities!"
Obviously, it took over forty years of legal battles to even uncover
the secret Ottaviani directive, it would probably take an act of
Congress to dig deeper. Some Catholics have taken the
position that Ottaviani's intent was to protect Church assets from
expensive litigation and keeping awkward misdeeds in house.
Atheists have countered; "only a pedophile would safeguard a
pedophile", which does present a certain logic. If the Church
was seeking to protect its assets, contacting the proper authorities
immediately upon learning of sexual child abuse would have
certainly accomplished that objective (12).
 |
In debate situations, atheists have attempted to float the
idea that pedophile priests over the years have actually
advanced to higher positions within the Catholic Church
hierarchy, and subsequently drafted internal legal directives,
documents and mandates to insulate and protect themselves from outside litigation. There may be a
certain logic to this supposition. Some praying Mantis
species disguise themselves as flower petals to snare their
victims. It would be reasonable to presume that ingenuitive pedophiles targeted careers as Boy Scout leaders,
Day Care Workers, Priests, etc. Jesus foreseen and
warned us to beware of wolves in sheep's clothing: "Beware of
false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but
inwardly they are ravening wolves" (Matthew 7:15). Before
considering taking any defensive posture, we highly recommend
becoming thoroughly familiar with the following site: |
Bishop-Accountability.org Another example that atheists had a field day with is when Bishop
Raymond Boland responded to a newspaper article that stated: "The
death rate of priests from AIDS is at least four times that of the
general population". Boland stated that these AIDS deaths show
that priests are only human. "A large part of the answer is
implicit in the remarkable response to the situation tendered by
Bishop Boland. To aver that a priest shows he is human by dying of
AIDS is to say that it is somehow natural to our human state to
engage in acts of passive consensual sodomy, from which the
resultant infection takes its predictable course" (13).
Boland was later implicated in purportedly lying to his enraged
congregation to protect a pedophile priest working with their
children, in which documents implicated that he was allegedly aware
the priest was a pedophile all along (14,
15).
"And whosoever shall offend one of
these little ones that believe in me, it is better for him that a
millstone were hanged about his neck, and he were cast into the sea"
(Mark 9:42).
The necessary lesson of Judas is a powerful warning in the Gospel,
if a disciple taught directly by Jesus can gravely falter, any other
Church figure under the Pope can also gravely falter. Our
prayers certainly address all the mortified Priests who are in God's
service for all the right reasons, this scandal must have taken a
tremendous toll (16).
Priests are holy people who dedicate their lives to God.
Although it is wise to be cautious, insects have not chosen to
completely abandon all flowers because of the diminutive risk of
landing on one containing a praying mantis mimicking a petal.
It is amazing how much damage can be done by a tiny fraction.
It takes entrepreneurship, time, planning, architects, builders,
carpenters, electricians, plumbers, etc. to build a house. It
only takes one evil person with one match to destroy it.
Unfortunately, those bent on destruction have this innate unfair leverage,
namely; "It is much easier to destroy than to create".
We are deeply grieved and apologize for these unpleasantries, but it is necessary to be
prepared for the most likely criticisms, as not to be caught
off-guard. As Catholics, we question how we could have ever got
to this point, this is where some Private Revelations can help
explain these Institutional breakdowns. Through
a message given on October
13th (the anniversary day of the last
Apparition of the Virgin Mary to the three children of Fatima and
coinciding with the year of the Roe vs. Wade decision that became
responsible for the deaths of over 55 million innocent unborn babies
in the US alone), by Our most Holy Mother to Sister Agnes Katsuko Sasagawa
in Akita, Japan (declared
worthy of belief by Cardinal Ratzinger, now Pope Benedict, as well
as the Local Bishop Ito) we are told: "The
work of the devil will infiltrate even into the Church in such a way
that one will see Cardinals opposing Cardinals, Bishops against
other Bishops. The Priests who venerate Me will be scorned and
opposed by their confreres (other Priests). Churches and altars will
be sacked. The Church will be full of those who accept compromises,
and the demon will press many Priests and consecrated souls to leave
the service of the Lord" (17,
18,
19).
The following is a link to some of the most informative blog debates
on the web. Albeit protracted, it is essential to read them (in
their entirety) if you are considering debating with
atheists:
CatholicTruthScotland.com/Blog/2009/11/The-Grand-Catholic-Truth-Debate
Believers.org/Argue.htm
AtheistNexus.org/profiles/blogs/atheists-trounce-Catholics-in
Infidels.org/Library/modern/Frank_Zindler
It would be helpful to review these blogs very carefully, as the crass
lack of ethics and morals can be a considerable shock when debating
with some atheists, sort of like thrusting a child as pure as new
fallen snow into
a Turkish prison. Although most of the atheists writing on
these blogs seem to be striving to get a rise out of Catholics by
crude sexual comments and viewpoints, others seem to envision a world as portrayed
by Woody Allen in the 1973 futuristic comedy film "Sleeper",
in which everybody has sex with everybody all the time, and no
children. It seems their only motive for existence
is the perfection of complete sexual promiscuousness, and the cure
to all the Earth's dilemmas can only be solved by flying around in
squadrons of airplanes and helicopters sprinkling condoms all over
the world. Many assert that the Catholic Church is killing societies with Aids
because it preaches abstinence. That abortion, condoms and sex
are the answer to everything. Notwithstanding that abstinence
is 100% effective and condoms are only 87% effective at best.
If you had a Russian Roulette pistol that could hold a 100 chamber
cylinder, with 13 bullets in it (87 empty chambers), would you
willingly spin the cylinder, put it in your mouth and pull the
trigger? A "no" answer is abstinence, a "yes" answer is
condoms. It's simple math, what's not to understand?
Furthermore, the false sense of security of condoms leads to
increased sexual encounters, so the hypothetical Russian Roulette
pistol is in your mouth much more often. At some point, the
odds will obviously catch up. Moreover, observe the hostility
and rage directed at any institution that stands in the way of their
Utopian society base purely on sex. They seem to manifest a
sexual addiction, like a drug addict who would lash out against anyone standing in the way of their next fix.
Atheist will continuously try to draw and keep the debate focused
specifically on condoms, (you would think most of them had their
entire stock portfolio invested entirely in condoms). In
debate situations, atheist typically craft countless unrealistic
scenarios to justify condoms, and then ask; "Would the Roman
Catholic Church recommend condoms if that were the case?"
Almost like dealing with a two year old, with the constant "What
ifs". You will also detect a very noticeable hatred towards
God, and begin to realize; "How can anyone have such deep rooted
hatred for something they proclaim doesn't exist?"
Moreover, this rage seems to be similar to "angry child syndrome",
whereas some children attempt to provoke a reaction from the parent
(God) via negative behavior. This can be clearly seen in one
of the above examples,
particularly with the atheist who repeatedly posted the provoking parody
he made up of the Lord's Prayer. When
occasional statements arise similar to; "I would rather be laughing
with my friends in hell, than spend eternity in Heaven crying with
the Saints", it might be considered a Freudian
slip of a belief in an afterlife (20). |
