home
RSS
January 19th, 2011
10:50 AM ET

Church letter warns against mandatory reporting of child sex abuse

A 1997 letter from the Vatican's representative to bishops in Ireland warns them to follow church law in investigating cases of suspected child sex abuse by priests and expresses "serious reservations" about requiring that such cases be reported to the police.

The Vatican has responded by calling the letter "deeply misunderstood."

And a spokesman for the Conference of Irish Bishops said they have since 1996 had a policy of reporting suspected abuse to the police.

The two-page letter, written by Apostolic Nuncio Luciano Storero, was sent to bishops in Ireland in response to a document they had sent to the Vatican that recommends mandatory reporting of cases of suspected child sex abuse by priests.

Read the full story about the letter here.

- CNN Belief Blog

Filed under: Bishops • Catholic Church • Christianity • Courts • Europe • Ireland • Pope Benedict XVI • Vatican

soundoff (165 Responses)
  1. Evolved DNA

    Catholic mom Jesus called his buddies slaves.. nice guy..Also, was Jesus not God as well...according to Catholics? what totally confusing mess these stories are. I love my family and my children and my friends and I am an atheist...it is some what appalling that those who believe in spirits think they are the only ones who are capable of love.

    January 22, 2011 at 11:43 am |
    • CatholicMom

      Evolved DNA,

      Slaves to sin….but if we pick up our cross and follow Jesus thus doing the will of the Father in Heaven, we no longer are slaves to sin and thus become friends.
      Yes, Jesus had a divine as well as human nature…divine nature from the Holy Spirit, human nature from Mary.
      Whoever said atheists are not capable of love? We are all imbued with love since God is our Creator and He is Love itself.

      January 22, 2011 at 1:44 pm |
    • Evolved DNA

      Catholic Mom..what do you mean god is love himself.. he demands obedience and punishes if he thinks you have "sinned" would you live in a relation ship like that ?.. I see nothing of virtue in believing in this myth. Religion is a money maker..your church being one of the richest. Only when humans shake of the shackles of religion and we work together can there be peace..

      January 22, 2011 at 10:46 pm |
    • CatholicMom

      Evolved DNA,

      God is pure LOVE. There is no sin in Him…no hate of anyone but only of sin. The evil one is full of sin…not just touched by it. We are touched by sin. God loves us enough to allow the evil one to have his way with our lives if that is what we want [such as secret evils we want to do] and in some cases, such evils as disease is something we don’t want. But in either case, God can bring about a good from it for our benefit.

      Yes, God made us and He is our Creator. We should be moved to great love for Him when we realize this. Those living in the gutter may wonder how they can love God when they have dreadful lives….these people need to see God who is living in the Christian who shows compassion towards them. If they never see compassion from anyone, we are failing in showing love, and failing in our purpose. We must forever and always look to our neighbor and want the best for him in everything…that is love.

      God is pure love and wants all to be saved by His grace. This grace is a seed in us at our conception…it is a love that shines forth in how we treat others which is ‘our neighbor’, so to speak. Being Baptized then is when the Holy Spirit is given to each of us which is grace to continue in this love of neighbor with greater desire to accomplish it because now the Holy Spirit is working through us. Confirmation is another Sacrament which affirms us in His grace and empowers us to have no fear in speaking of and in doing the will of our Father in Heaven.

      Obedience is necessary to stay on the right Path because the evil one is near at hand with temptations for us. If you had a child and you told your child to stay away from the neighbor’s fenced in pit-bull but your child headed for the fence and put his hand threw it but you were there and saved him from getting ripped apart by the dog…would you not discipline your child? A discipline that corrects bad behavior, molds new behavior, out of love of your child?

      We all are children of God and He disciplines us with His love because He wants to save everyone.

      January 23, 2011 at 9:21 am |
    • Evolved DNA

      HI Catholic mom.. I have no doubt you are sincere in your beliefs, but your last response was just a repeat of unsubstantiated dogma. Where was god when many thousands were killed in tsunamis, earthquakes, starving to death in Africa, abuse of children at the hands of some priests, those killed in 9/11 and the London bombings? If you think god is love, then this is new use of the word" love" that i was previously unaware of.

      January 23, 2011 at 12:54 pm |
    • CatholicMom

      Evolved DNA,

      Abuse of children by priests, starving in Africa, and terrorists killing are a direct cause of man sinning….lust, greed, and hate promote most of our troubles we endure as humans. God does not interfere with our will to do as we want.

      Tsunamis, earthquakes, and storms are natural disasters which when people are hurt can be the result of satan. Why doesn’t God with His infinite Love save us from all adversity?

      Each must face a certain amount of suffering and affliction in this life; we know God’s grace is sufficient to sustain us and look upon it as spiritual discipline. What Father does not discipline his child? We are asked to take up our cross and follow Him. We join our sufferings with His and are truly children of God.

      This world is the kingdom of satan and he will do what he will. We have Jesus Christ’s kingdom on earth…His Church from which we receive grace to sustain us on our journey to Heaven. It is the plan of Satan to cause as many as he can to lose Faith in God by these disasters and all the ways that he is capable of doing; however Satan has found out that it does not always cause people to fall away from Jesus Christ but actually become stronger in their Faith even unto death. It is the cause of Faith in some people. God makes good out of every pain and suffering.

      January 24, 2011 at 10:53 pm |
  2. NL

    God has friends, ... obedient... friends?

    Anybody else out there have any 'obedient' friends. If you do, have you ever wondered what they actually think of you? Your od sounds like a real tool.

    January 20, 2011 at 11:42 pm |
    • NL

      Oops, that should read "Your God sounds like a real tool." 'Obedient' friends, what an endearing personality trait.

      January 20, 2011 at 11:46 pm |
    • CatholicMom

      Jesus said to his disciples: “This is my commandment: love one another as I love you. No one has greater love than this, to lay down one’s life for one’s friends. You are my friends if you do what I command you. I no longer call you slaves, because a slave does not know what his master is doing.

      I have called you friends, because I have told you everything I have heard from my Father. It was not you who chose me, but I who chose you and appointed you to go and bear fruit that will remain, so that whatever you ask the Father in my name he may give you.

      This I command you: love one another.” http://usccb.org/nab/050710.shtml

      January 21, 2011 at 10:11 pm |
  3. Philip

    Oh contrare my friend. God does in fact want His friends lovingly defending His righteousness. If there were not even one who called himself God's friend, God would "cause the rocks to cry forth". It is very important to God that his obedient ones defend Him against those who deny Him, and against those who besmirch His good name by commiting horific acts in His name. And yes, evolution contradicts God's word. In time this will be made apparent to you and everyone else. All will come to know that there is a true God, and then they can decide wether to be obedient to God's government, or to some human government. It's been intersting, this chat. Hope to see you all around again soon. Goodnight.

    January 20, 2011 at 9:35 pm |
    • Doc Vestibule

      @Philip
      Even if we ignore Adam and Eve and postulate for the sake of argument that they were genetically perfect, coming from Eden and all, we're still left with a fair conundrum when trying to explain the diversity of the human species.
      According the the Noah legend, after the flood there were 4 mating pairs of humans. This is not a sufficient number to avoid the immediate pitfalls of inbreeding, which include reduced fertility, vastly increases chances of genetic disorders, facial assymmetry, high infant mortality, low birth rate, slower growth, lessened adult size, compromised immune systems, etc.
      It would take around 70-90 breeding pairs to have a healthy herd of humans.
      But the biblical accounts also tell us that each of Noah's sons went off to live on their own, thus the communities of humans wouldn't have many opportunities to inter-breed and the problems of inbreeding would become exponentially greater.

      I hope you don't dismiss Mendelian genetics as readily as you reject evolution.

      January 21, 2011 at 8:48 am |
  4. Philip

    Yes, I do. "God is love", evolution isn't. And God allows these bad things to happen because of his love for us. He could have righteously ended our wicked system long ago, but His love allowed for His justice to wait. God lovingly allows this current corrupt system to go on so that there may be more time allowed for people to become His friends. Even perfect love and patience has it's limits, and God knows when we have reached our limit. There is still time! And the evidence that the earth will one day be a global paradise is just now forthcoming. Nothing can stop the earth from becoming warmer and becoming the paradise God purposed for all who love to enjoy, forever. Look for more evidence of this and God's true intentions for the earth to be made even more evident in the near future.

    January 20, 2011 at 8:28 pm |
    • Eric G.

      Ok, you big silly...... Now you are just making stuff up on the fly. Why do you feel threatened by evolution theory? No mention is made of your, or any other god in evolution theory. Where in the evolutionary theory does it say your god does not exist? I think you have studied evolutionary theory and know that it is fact. I think this frightens you because you realize that your god had nothing to do with it. I think you want your god to be real, so you deny annoying things like facts and truth to defend your god. If your god was real, he would not need you to defend him. It's ok. You can admit that your belief in your god makes no sense. He will not mind. Deep down you already know this, because you know he does not exist.

      January 20, 2011 at 9:03 pm |
  5. Philip

    the bible, rather.

    January 20, 2011 at 8:02 pm |
  6. Philip

    Why would evolution provide humans with the capacity to love forever if survival of the fittest were true? Love is not a requirement for an animal of any kind to have in order to live out it's days, so why would evolution provide us with such a loving capacity? Only they bible contains the answer to this question.

    January 20, 2011 at 7:42 pm |
    • Eric G.

      Using your logic, your god must be responsible for humans capacity for hatred, bigotry, violence.............. Or, do you have someone else you decided to blame them on? Do you have any proof that your god is responsible for love? Do you have any verifiable evidence that your god is responsible for anything?

      January 20, 2011 at 8:10 pm |
  7. Philip

    Human capacity to love is proof that there is a loving God. Evolution cannot account for the genuine love a human mother has for her child and the planning of her childs future. The idea of lovingly caring for ones offspring even after that loved one dies, showing loving concern for everlasting welfare, is unique among humans. Evolution cannot account for love, the greatest of all human emotions.

    January 20, 2011 at 7:37 pm |
    • NL

      So, you don't believe that animals can love? Have you never met a dog?

      January 20, 2011 at 11:36 pm |
    • Doc Vestibule

      @Philip
      Various fields of science have provided a scientific explanation for love.
      Pair bonding is a necessary evolutionary adaptation. It takes two parents to raise an infant to the point where it can become self-sufficient, especially in the ancient world. In case you haven't noticed, human babies are utterly helpless for an unusually long time compared to other species. In a natural, hostile environment lacking a supportive community, a single mother would not be able to keep a child alive. Both mother and child would most likely die in the first weeks after birth.
      There are two phases to love – se.xual attraction and pair bonding. Different chemicals in the brain are responsible for each.
      Dopamine, norepinephrine, and serotonin are primarily responsible (along with testosterone in both se.xes) for the "eros" phase. Oxytocin and vasopressin then become the primary catalysts for "agape" – or long term attachment.
      And we are not the only animals who experience this. All mammals have a sense of empathy and are emotionally attuned to those around them. This is called "limbic resonance" and has been demonstrated, doc.umented, and repeated in laboratory settings.

      A Candid Conversation between Two Species

      The Man: I am the predilect object of Creation, the centre of all that exists…
      The Tapeworm: You are exalting yourself a little. If you consider yourself the lord of Creation, what can I be, who feed upon you and am ruler in your entrails?
      The Man: You lack reason and an immortal soul.
      The Tapeworm: And since it is an established fact that the concentration and complexity of the nervous system appear in the animal scale as an uninterrupted series of graduations, where are we cut off? How many neurons must be possessed in order to have a soul and a little rationality?
      – Santiago Ramon y Cajal, Recollections of My Life

      January 21, 2011 at 8:21 am |
  8. boskolives

    Why is it that when a bad thing happens religious folks will say "This is all my fault",
    but when something good happens they say something like "god is smiling on me today"?

    Just can't catch a break, eh?

    http://www.boskolives.wordpress.com

    January 20, 2011 at 5:28 pm |
  9. Philip

    @Nominus...for a human to form, cells must come together. For a cell to from, chromosomes must come together. In order for evolution to occur, these things must have happened by accident. We know for a fact that the odds are very slim even from a purely mathmatical viewpoint. From a moral viewpoint, evolution is totally blind.

    January 20, 2011 at 4:56 pm |
    • MarkinFL

      Like justice?

      January 20, 2011 at 5:07 pm |
    • Nonimus

      @Philip,
      First, the cells don't come together, humans form from a single cell which divides repeatedly.
      Second, when science speaks of biological evolution it's talking about the development of life after life began, from early single celled organisms to us today. How the first life began, abiogenesis, is still being researched, but there are some promising hypotheses out there. However, biological evolution is not a random process, natural selection is very non-random in that those organisms that survive and reproduce best, have more offspring which can then survive and reproduce again, and thus are naturally selected.

      January 20, 2011 at 5:26 pm |
  10. Nonimus

    "The Hebrew word for circle can also be translated a 'sphere' and is rightly so in many bibles."
    Could you specify which Bible, because I haven't found a version that says 'sphere' instead of 'circle' in Isaiah 40:22?
    '
    I don't know much about Hebrew but this seems reasonable: "This view seems most unlikely since we have all ready seen that the Hebrew word gh means 'circle,' and it seems very remote that it means 'sphere' because of the context, and there is a better Hebrew word for 'sphere,' rwd. In Isaiah 22:18 the word rwd is translated 'ball.'"

    I'm not certain what to make of hanging upon nothing, since usually we hang stuff 'from' something.

    January 20, 2011 at 4:27 pm |
    • Nonimus

      Sorry, double post. see reply to Phillip above.

      January 20, 2011 at 4:33 pm |
  11. MarkinFL

    organized

    January 20, 2011 at 4:26 pm |
    • MarkinFL

      HAH!, I've identified my fifth filtered word of the day!
      "soph.omore"

      I was guessing between "organ"ized and the above mentioned word.

      January 20, 2011 at 4:29 pm |
    • Nonimus

      I'm guessing ho.mo is the problem

      January 20, 2011 at 4:32 pm |
    • MarkinFL

      I'm sure you are correct. I'm really getting tired of being sent to moderated land for using the English language beyond Kindergarten level. For any post more than a few words long I'm writing it in an external editor and searching for some of the short "naughty" words. sheesh!

      January 20, 2011 at 5:16 pm |
    • Peace2All

      @MarkinFL

      ...I feel for ya' brother on the moderation filter situation.

      Peace...

      January 20, 2011 at 5:46 pm |
  12. Philip

    Scientists have calculated the odds of our chromosomes, both right and left handed ones, all lining up in the proper sequence by accident to be less than one in ten to the 50th power. Even Eistein recognized that such a marvel as the laws of physics must of had a designer. All of the earths glory attests to a marvelous design. Such glory and capacity for love of the earth's goodness attest to the fact that it was all designed. Nothing so wonderous and awe inspiring could be the result of an accident. That's why we know that when a car gets in an accident, it's original design may become obscured. Never was there a new car involved in an accident that came out looking better than before. Our earth is not the result of an accident.

    January 20, 2011 at 4:16 pm |
    • MarkinFL

      Actually, I've never seen anything that looks more like an accident than life on this planet. If this was planned, it was a term project by a second year soph.omore god. I should think that a full-fledged god could make life a lot less messy and far more org.anized.

      January 20, 2011 at 4:26 pm |
    • Nonimus

      @Philip,
      "Scientists have calculated the odds of our chromosomes, both right and left handed ones, all lining up in the proper sequence by accident to be less than one in ten to the 50th power."
      I'm guessing the term Scientist is used loosely here. Basically, even if this was done with any accuracy, there is no point in calculating it since no one is suggesting that our chromosomes lined up all at once in the right order by accident. It was done by evolution, incrementally.

      "All of the earths glory attests to a marvelous design. Such glory and capacity for love of the earth's goodness attest to the fact that it was all designed. Nothing so wonderous and awe inspiring could be the result of an accident."
      This is all just assertion without any evidence.

      "Never was there a new car involved in an accident that came out looking better than before."
      Opinion.

      "Our earth is not the result of an accident."
      Assertion. The earth did originally form by random events, but the life on Earth did not develop randomly or by accident, it was evolution; mutation, natural selection, gentic drift, se.xual selection, etc.

      January 20, 2011 at 4:45 pm |
  13. Philip

    The Hebrew word for circle can also be translated a "sphere" and is rightly so in many bibles. You fail to mention "hanging upon nothing" though. How would you explain simple men knowing this thousands of years before scientists? As far as the "earths foundations"...they remain the same, still faithfully orbiting the sun to this very day. What more solid foundation could there be?

    January 20, 2011 at 3:56 pm |
    • MarkinFL

      You act as if "scientists" were a creation of some kind. They are just people that use a rational approach to understanding the world. There have been many people throughout history that have thought about things in a scientific manner. It is also easy to read an ancient doc.ument with current knowledge and ascribe whatever meaning we HOPE they meant. I note that you mention that the word can also mean sphere which clearly implies that it also means circle. So you are just assuming that they meant sphere because you believe the bible to be infallible and your current knowledge informs you that we live on a sphere, so you choose to believe they meant sphere.
      Your stretching of "foundation" is a bit trickier and frankly enters into the realm of defining anything they said to mean what we currently know about the universe.

      January 20, 2011 at 4:15 pm |
    • Doc Vestibule

      The hebrew word in the bible passage is 'gh', which means "circle".
      The word for "sphere" is 'rwd'.

      January 20, 2011 at 4:21 pm |
    • Know What

      "The Hebrew word for circle can also be translated a "sphere" and is rightly so in many bibles."

      Hmmmm, that 'correct' translation wouldn't happen to have been adopted *after* they knew the true shape of Earth, would it?

      January 20, 2011 at 4:21 pm |
    • Nonimus

      Nonimus
      "The Hebrew word for circle can also be translated a 'sphere' and is rightly so in many bibles."
      Could you specify which Bible, because I haven't found a version that says 'sphere' instead of 'circle' in Isaiah 40:22?
      '
      I don't know much about Hebrew but this seems reasonable: "This view seems most unlikely since we have all ready seen that the Hebrew word gh means 'circle,' and it seems very remote that it means 'sphere' because of the context, and there is a better Hebrew word for 'sphere,' rwd. In Isaiah 22:18 the word rwd is translated 'ball.'"

      I'm not certain what to make of hanging upon nothing, since usually we hang stuff 'from' something.

      January 20, 2011 at 4:29 pm |
  14. Philip

    @Steve...very well said. While science was teaching That the earth was flat, or as the ancient Greeks were teaching, that the earth was a hemisphere supported by four large elephants riding on a giant tortise, the bible writers described it as a sphere hanging upon nothing. Thousands of years before science discovered the earth was round, simple men who knew little of science but much of God, understood and wrote it down. And still science takes the credit for discovering the earth isn't flat as they had earlier taught.

    January 20, 2011 at 3:38 pm |
    • Know What

      Philip:

      "...the bible writers described it as a sphere..."

      No, they described it as a 'circle', which can be construed as sort of a disc. They had words for 'sphere' and 'ball' etc., but did not describe Earth using these words.

      January 20, 2011 at 3:46 pm |
    • Nonimus

      They also said "He set the earth on its foundations; it can never be moved." Which would cause problems when orbiting around the sun.

      January 20, 2011 at 3:49 pm |
    • Doc Vestibule

      @Philip
      The bible describes the Earth as a circle, not a sphere.
      A circle is flat.
      Isaiah 40:22
      "He sits enthroned above the circle of the earth, and its people are like grasshoppers. He stretches out the heavens like a canopy, and spreads them out like a tent to live in."

      There are numerous passages that refer to the "four corners of the earth".
      Isaiah 11:12
      And he shall set up an ensign for the nations, and shall assemble the outcasts of Israel, and gather together the dispersed of Judah from the four corners of the earth.
      Revelation 7:1
      And after these things I saw four angels standing on four corners of the earth, holding the four winds of the earth, that the wind should not blow on the earth, nor on the sea, nor on any tree.

      If we are to accept the innerancy of the bible and interpret it literally, then these inconsistencies cannot stand.

      January 20, 2011 at 4:06 pm |
    • Steve the real one

      Doc and Know What,

      You are missing the point! How would Isaiah EVEN know the earth was a circle? Take a look at any NASA photos of the earth and you wil see a circle. Yet sphere can indicate depth! You don't get depth by looking at NASA photo of the Earth! Look ata te moon and sun, from of vantage point they look like circles! Back to my point. How would Isaiah EVEN know the shape of the earth?

      January 20, 2011 at 4:43 pm |
    • Steve the real one

      Doc,

      The four corners of the Earth would be the North, South, East , West!

      January 20, 2011 at 4:45 pm |
    • Nonimus

      @Steve the real one,
      I'm not sure if I understand your question, because it doesn't seem to me that Isaiah did know the shape of the earth. However, if you're asking how Isaiah even described it as a circle then I think you answered your own question, "Look ata te moon and sun, from of vantage point they look like circles!" Perhaps, Isaiah extrapolated from the apparent disks of the sun and moon to a flat disk shaped earth, but it may have also just been a carry over from Egyptian or Mesopotamian cosmology, which, I think, also described a flat disk shape surrounded by or floating on an ocean.

      January 20, 2011 at 5:11 pm |
    • Know What

      Steve,

      "How would Isaiah EVEN know the earth was a circle."

      They relied on simple observation. Stand, looking at the horizon, and rotate your body completely around until you are facing the same point - you have coursed a circle. They only knew what they saw.

      January 20, 2011 at 5:18 pm |
    • Know What

      Steve,

      I don't think that you realize how unknowledgeable these primitive Middle Eastern people were. The average 10 year-old child of today knows more about science than they did. Sure they figured some stuff out by observation, but just imagine a society composed only of today's 7 year-olds trying to make sense of everything and run things.

      January 20, 2011 at 5:32 pm |
  15. Philip

    And don't think for one minute that the world's political rulers were ignorant of church abuse until now. The church has provided a valuable service to world rulers for centuries, that of preaching their young members onto man's battlefields. The church is no longer needed for this, and as the world's ruler's tire of the church's constantly involving themselves in political affairs, they will and have been exposing the church's affairs for all to see. This would include the Jewish religion. The USA hasn't been arming Israel's enemies in order to help Israel now have they. all of the worlds false religions will be destroyed by the very governments they have been suppprting. Maybe they should have been supporting God's government instead.

    January 20, 2011 at 3:25 pm |
  16. Philip

    It's not about Philip. But thanks for noticing me.

    January 20, 2011 at 2:50 pm |
    • Peace2All

      @Philip

      No offense... nor did I think you were somehow the 'star' of the show. Just sometimes how my mind works.

      Peace...

      January 20, 2011 at 3:06 pm |
  17. Philip

    @NL...so you agree, that even after all these centuries of evolution, man remains alone as the only animal given the brain capacity to consider the distant future. That is my point. Humans are distinct from animals, something evolution simply cannot account for. Animals use their entire brain to function, while humans, like Einstein, only use a very small percentage of their brain capacity to function.

    January 20, 2011 at 2:42 pm |
    • Peace2All

      @Philip

      You Said: "@NL...so you agree, that even after all these centuries of evolution, man remains alone as the only animal given the brain capacity to consider the distant future. That is my point. Humans are distinct from animals, something evolution simply cannot account for."

      That may or not be true, however...what i think is the underlying assertion you are trying to make here is, like a lot of believers, is that if, something hasn't YET, been fully explained and demonstrated, believers use the argument of the 'God of the Gaps.'

      In that, anything that is not fully explained by science...YET, is immediately discounted and inserted with..."See, it's because of God." Hence, the tendency to 'fill in the gaps' of our understanding with God.

      Again, hey... you may be right... there 'may' be a God, or grand designer behind all of this.

      I just wanted to merely point out your using the 'God of the Gaps' argument, does not necessarily make it accurate or truth.

      You Said: "Animals use their entire brain to function, while humans, like Einstein, only use a very small percentage of their brain capacity to function."

      Actually, in Neuro-biology, and Neurology, researchers have found that we humans actually 'do' use our brains...all of it... all the time. Some portions are being used at certain times more than others, but it is all being used. Now, supposedly our conscious minds can only pay attention to approximately... 7+ or – 2 bits or chunks of information at any given time. As our brains take in billions of bits of information in any given moment, but it is filtered before it gets to our conscious minds, otherwise we would be, to say the least, overwhelmed.

      I think what you are attempting to assert is 'capacity' or 'abilities' that we have been afforded as humans...? Is that what you meant...?

      Peace...

      January 20, 2011 at 3:18 pm |
    • Nonimus

      The human brain is the most complex brain, but it is still an incremental and evolutionary change from our ancestors. Humans are distinct from other animals because of our big brains, but giraffes, elephants, cheetahs, platypuses, etc. are all distinct in their own way.
      Humans using only a small percentage of their brain is a myth. We use our whole brain, just not all at once. Some areas are for speech, some for hearing, taste, movement, and higher thoughts as well, but it all gets used.

      "Though an alluring idea, the '10 percent myth' is so wrong it is almost laughable, says neurologist Barry Gordon at Johns Hopkins School of Medicine in Baltimore."
      ( http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=people-only-use-10-percent-of-brain )

      January 20, 2011 at 3:24 pm |
    • NL

      Philip-
      They may not have 401ks to manage but, like I said, some animals do put away for the future as much as resources and their means allow. Please don't misrepresent what I said.

      January 20, 2011 at 5:36 pm |
  18. Philip

    Evolution can't account for humans being the only animal that plans on retiring early. Ever seen an elephant storing up food so she can retire early? That we humans have this idea while other animals do not shows we got this idea from somewhere outside the animal kingdom brought to you by "evolution". But really, the outstanding proof that there is a creator comes from his own Son's prophecies concerning our time coming true exactly on schedule. Over 200 of them have come true, with very few left. No "evolved man" could write history 2,000 years in advance.

    January 20, 2011 at 1:29 pm |
    • Doc Vestibule

      @Phillip
      Actually, the neurological evolution of the human brain has been well mapped. We aren't the only animals capable of learning, planning, using tools etc. The octopus' neurology is vastly different than ours, and yet studies demonstrate that they are extraordinarily intelligent! They remember and learn from one another.

      Could you please provide a few example of the prophecies that Jesus Himself made regarding our times? Are they date specific, or could they be applicable to virtually any era?

      January 20, 2011 at 1:58 pm |
    • Doc Vestibule

      @Phillip
      And how about Nostradamus? Many people believe his prophecies have come true... does that make him divine?

      January 20, 2011 at 1:59 pm |
    • NL

      Squirrels and other animals gather and store food to get themselves through difficult seasons. Not too long ago humans could only hope to do the same. The concept of gathering an excess amount, enough to retire early, is only a very recent one, and something that sadly not all of us are able to achieve. Besides, the only wealth that animals value is food, which is far too perishable to store for very long.

      January 20, 2011 at 2:34 pm |
    • Peace2All

      I'm sure its my twisted mind... but -Philips' postings are somehow reminding me of the 'A & E' Channel show...."Hoarders."

      Is it just me...? 🙂

      Peace...

      January 20, 2011 at 2:44 pm |
  19. Philip

    Evolution has been disproven. And DNA proves we all came from the same original human pair. Humans of the animal specie are truly unique. We have a memory capacity that would take millions of years to even begin to fill, yet we only survive a few decades. This alone disproves evolution. But even the scientific odds of chromosomes actually lining up in the correct order ay accident are less than one in 10 to the 50th power according to the latest research. Odds this weak are generally dismissed as 'immpossible' by scientists, except when ot comes to evolution. google 'Stanley Miller' and learn how Congress allowed evolution being taught in our schools, based on what would later be found to be a hoax.

    January 20, 2011 at 1:09 pm |
    • Doc Vestibule

      Miller's experiments pertained to abiogenesis, not evolution.
      David Byers, executive director of the U.S. bishops' Committee on Science and Human Values from 1984 to 2003, has said that, “Denying that humans evolved seems by this point a waste of time.”
      Pope John Paul II said “[N]ew findings lead us toward the recognition of evolution as more than a hypothesis. In fact it is remarkable that this theory has had progressively greater influence on the spirit of researchers, following a series of discoveries in different scholarly disciplines. The convergence in the results of these independent studies—which was neither planned nor sought—const.itutes in itself a significant argument in favor of the theory.”

      How do you explain the fossil record or do you believe the universe to be 6000 years old?

      January 20, 2011 at 1:22 pm |
    • NL

      Phillip-
      A single mutation is credited for the development of all Navel oranges, but does that mean that Navel oranges should consider themselves specifically created by God?. Saying that all modern humans came from a single mating pair would be absolutely within the realm of possibility according to evolution whereas most creation stories have single humans, or single pairs of humans as the 'parents' of us all because that's how ancient people saw lineage. Adam and Eve are just typical characters in creation myth.

      January 20, 2011 at 2:28 pm |
  20. Philip

    In order to have someone else's believes "shoved down your throat", you must first open your own mouth.

    January 20, 2011 at 12:22 pm |
1 2 3
Advertisement
About this blog

The CNN Belief Blog covers the faith angles of the day's biggest stories, from breaking news to politics to entertainment, fostering a global conversation about the role of religion and belief in readers' lives. It's edited by CNN's Daniel Burke with contributions from Eric Marrapodi and CNN's worldwide news gathering team.