RicOlie_2

RicOlie_2 said:

chyron8472 said:

moviefreakedmind said:

Christ on a cross. . .

Why do some people say “Jesus H. Christ” or “Christ on a crutch”?
What is the “H” supposed to stand for, and why a crutch?

I never understood why people say that.

“Crutch” might be a deliberate mispronunciation of “cross,” but I’m not really sure.

My theory regarding “Jesus H. Christ” is that in Catholic churches (and on other Catholic things) you’ll often see inscriptions like “JHC” or “JHS.” These stand for Jesus’ name (or in more recent times have been interpreted as a short form of “Jesus Hominum Salvator”, which is Latin for “Jesus Saviour of Mankind”), and are a transcription of the first three letters of his name in Greek (hence the variation between C and S). My guess is that some people, seeing that and not knowing what it meant, but knowing it referred to Jesus, interpreted it as his initials.

JEDIT: Hey, Wikipedia backs me up. It says that it’s common in the Anglican/Episcopalian Church as well, which is likely where exposure to the “JHC” abbreviation would have come in.

JEDIT: Oops, that wasn’t a JEDIT…

chyron8472 said:

moviefreakedmind said:

Christ on a cross. . .

Why do some people say “Jesus H. Christ” or “Christ on a crutch”?
What is the “H” supposed to stand for, and why a crutch?

I never understood why people say that.

“Crutch” might be a deliberate mispronunciation of “cross,” but I’m not really sure.

My theory regarding “Jesus H. Christ” is that in Catholic churches (and on other Catholic things) you’ll often see inscriptions like “JHC” or “JHS.” These stand for Jesus’ name (or in more recent times have been interpreted as a short form of “Jesus Hominum Salvator”, which is Latin for “Jesus Saviour of Mankind”), and are a transcription of the first three letters of his name in Greek (hence the variation between C and S). My guess is that some people, seeing that and not knowing what it meant, but knowing it referred to Jesus, interpreted it as his initials.

I think it’s not so much that the Church is horrible at self-reflection as the fact that Church teaching emphasizes personal guilt over institutional guilt. I don’t think the problem comes down to anything intrinsic to the Church, rather it is the result of individual sin, whether of sex abusers or of bishops who covered it up.

And it also depends on what you mean by “the Church.” Nearly every saint I’ve read writes in some way about how horrible their own sins are and how much evil there is in the Church.

Yup. Sin in general is disgusting, but pedophilic abuse of children is pretty close to the top of the list. The fact that so many priests have exploited the trust people have for them is simply horrific, as most priests would agree. Fortunately for its credibility, the Church has never claimed to not be full of hypocrites and sinners, because being Christian doesn’t seem to affect the way some people behave.

DominicCobb said:

If I remember correctly, the estimate was 6% of priests.

I did a bit more research on it, and it looks like different numbers come from different countries. In Australia, it’s a disgusting 7%. In the US, it’s about 4%. In most countries, though, it’s significantly lower, as far as I can tell, so 1% might not be that far off globally. I can’t find any global statistics to back that up though. By way of anecdotal evidence, however, I think there have been only a handful of cases across western Canada, meaning that significantly less than 1% of priests here are guilty of abuse (in Eastern Canada, the problem is far more severe, unfortunately).

I found this article interesting: http://www.newsweek.com/priests-commit-no-more-abuse-other-males-70625 (the Washington Post also supports that claim).

There are about 500,000 priests in the world, so it’s closer to 5,000. That’s 5,000 too many, but it’s hardly symptomatic of a general crisis in the Church. The fact that these priests have been able to abuse so many children and adolescents is perhaps indicative of the trust which most Catholics rightfully have for priests, that allows the 1% the opportunity to abuse minors.

It’s also worth noting that the problem is a societal problem, not an ecclesiastical one. In 2014, for example, there were 781 teachers school staff accused of sexual abuse (see here)—in the US alone. According to one study, 10% of students experience some form of sexual abuse from school staff (see here). Perhaps the problem with the Church’s past handling of the situation stems from the fact that it preaches mercy, and this is sometimes applied to sex offenders to the detriment of justice.

Here’s a good article on the subject: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/has-media-ignored-sex-abuse-in-school/

JEDIT: Ugh, I keep forgetting what thread I’m in. I’m just too keen on getting into debates…

moviefreakedmind said:

RicOlie_2 said:

Warbler said:

RicOlie_2 said:

Warbler said:

Okay, I’ve decided to return and see how things go.

HI RicOlie_2!

btw, did you see moviefreakedmind’s new avatar? What do you think of it?

Hi!

I saw his avatar, but wasn’t really sure what it was till now. Actually, I’m still not entirely sure what it’s supposed to be depicting.

It is a pic of Sinead O Connor when she tore apart the pic of Pope John Paul II on Saturday Night Live.

Ah. It makes me sad more than anything, that people would think that way about such a holy pope and about the Church. I wasn’t familiar with that particular incident on SNL, so I looked it up and watched part of an interview with Sinéad. What a deluded human being. It’s terrible that she had to suffer abuse as a child, though. It sounds like that was the main source of her attitude towards the Church.

It makes me sad more than anything that that man is viewed a “such a holy pope.” His complicity in the mass child rape and the Church’s cover-up of the mass child rape makes him an accessory at the absolute best, and likely far, far worse. I’d call his defenders the deluded human beings. Before anyone claims I’m being mean or “bigoted” for the use of the word deluded, I’d like to point out that I, since I hold the same position as Sinéad, was called deluded first. This isn’t the thread for such statements so I won’t state how I really feel about John Paul II, but since I’m kind of being implicated in this exchange I felt the need to explain my side. Interestingly, the reason I have this picture is because I was asked to change my old avatar since it made it look like I was a banned user, and for reasons I don’t quite remember anymore I wanted an anti-establishment, fight-the-power image as my avatar so I chose Sinéad.

I don’t want to completely derail this thread, so I’ll keep my responses relatively brief:

I suspect JP II either naïvely gave guilty priests the benefit of the doubt or was simply ignorant of the extent of their wrongdoings. “Mass child rape” is certainly not a fitting expression for atrocities committed by 1% of priests, but I certainly agree that the pope should have done more. I don’t think he was perfect by any means.

By referring to Sinéad as deluded, I was referring primarily to her claim that child abuse is at the root of all the world’s problems, and her belief that she is Catholic despite rejecting the Catholic Church outright. I get the impression that you’re intelligent enough not to espouse those positions.

I’ve missed you guys, LOL.

Warbler said:

RicOlie_2 said:

Warbler said:

Okay, I’ve decided to return and see how things go.

HI RicOlie_2!

btw, did you see moviefreakedmind’s new avatar? What do you think of it?

Hi!

I saw his avatar, but wasn’t really sure what it was till now. Actually, I’m still not entirely sure what it’s supposed to be depicting.

It is a pic of Sinead O Connor when she tore apart the pic of Pope John Paul II on Saturday Night Live.

Ah. It makes me sad more than anything, that people would think that way about such a holy pope and about the Church. I wasn’t familiar with that particular incident on SNL, so I looked it up and watched part of an interview with Sinéad. What a deluded human being. It’s terrible that she had to suffer abuse as a child, though. It sounds like that was the main source of her attitude towards the Church.

Warbler said:

Okay, I’ve decided to return and see how things go.

HI RicOlie_2!

btw, did you see moviefreakedmind’s new avatar? What do you think of it?

Hi!

I saw his avatar, but wasn’t really sure what it was till now. Actually, I’m still not entirely sure what it’s supposed to be depicting.

Good to see you all too! Life’s been treating me pretty well. I’ve been thoroughly enjoying year one of ten of seminary (speaking of which, I’m probably better able to answer questions about my faith than I have been before). I’ve also got yet another sibling on the way (brother number five). Oh, and I finally got to leave Canada for the first time a couple months ago. So there’s not a whole lot I can reasonably complain about.

Well, I’ll take quality over a shorter wait-time any day of the week.

This isn’t a going away post, so I’m not entirely sure if I’m posting in the right thread, but hi.

Whether I find the time to post here often remains to be determined, but it’s good to be back.

Also, why the f***k is a certain edit not finished yet? Frink, you’ve only got so many years left to finish the thing. You shouldn’t tempt fate like this at your age.

(I can’t believe you thought I swore! I meant “why the frink”!)

Thank you probably isn’t the best response to your post, Warbler, but I guess I could say that I appreciate that you appreciate me being here (unless you’re saying darn that you’ll see me in June ;P).

darth_ender said:

You’ll be missed 😃

So will you!

And off I go…

And off I go again. Nice seeing you all. I’ll catch up with you in June sometime…

Sounds like quite a guy. Is the role of a Mormon president comparable to that of the Pope? Or are they only superficially similar?

Mike O said:

Snowing, bitterly cold, sometimes dropping down as low as -2-6.

Doesn’t sound like you’d enjoy the -20 to -26 weather we’ve had for the past week (and it’s not at all abnormal here for it to go down to -40 for a couple days every winter).

And if you mean -2 degrees Celsius, then that’s just pathetic. 😉

Literally colder than both the North and the South Pole (which sounds bad, but is still several degrees warmer than what our lowest temperatures usually are).

darth_ender said:

What was the liturgical celebration for the Third Day of Christmas?

The Feast of St. John the Evangelist

darth_ender said:

I know there is a significant Catholic celebration for today as well, but I don’t remember what it is and won’t bother to look it up right now. For the moment, enjoy thinking about four calling birds and getting that song stuck in your head for the rest of the day!

It’s the Feast of the Holy Infants (all the babies Herod killed trying to get Jesus).

Yes…as a matter of fact, it’s already prepared. I’ll be having leftovers.

Also, I disapprove of the heavily secularized thread title. #Puttheholyinfantsbackinthefeastoftheholyinfants

None, alas. I did eat chicken though.

Ah, OK. A bit like Elijah then.

While we’re on the topic of saints and feast days, is it true that Mormons believe that the apostle John (whose feast day Catholics celebrate today) is still alive and wandering around?

Happy feast of St. Stephen / 2nd day of the Octave of Christmas!

Do Mormons even celebrate feast days besides things like Christmas?