September 6th, 2012
09:09 PM ET

Catholic bishop convicted of shielding priest

By the CNN Wire Staff

(CNN) - A judge in Kansas City, Missouri, has sentenced a Catholic bishop to two years on probation for failure to report suspected child abuse, officials said Thursday.

Bishop Robert W. Finn, 59, is the highest-ranking Catholic official to be convicted during the church's long sexual abuse scandal.

Finn won't serve any jail time or pay a fine, the Jackson County Prosecuting Attorney's office said. The misdemeanor charge had a maximum penalty of one year in prison and a fine of as much as $1,000.

Read the full story on the conviction of Kansas City's bishop
- CNN Belief Blog

Filed under: Catholic Church • Missouri

soundoff (113 Responses)
  1. ScottCA

    (to the tune of "Love Shack"])
    Hitch slap in a little old face will
    Get you satisfaction.
    Hitch slap ba-a-beee ...
    (Hitch slap, baby)
    Hitch slap, baby, hitch slap!
    Htich slap, I don't believe crap!
    Hitchj slap, shut your big yap.


    September 8, 2012 at 1:57 am |
  2. ScottCA

    They should have given this guy life in prison for spreading lies and ignorance that kill so many people.

    September 8, 2012 at 1:52 am |
  3. tuvia

    מלחמה בלתי נגמרת

    September 7, 2012 at 8:59 pm |
  4. AvdBerg

    For a better understanding of the history and s.exual abuse in the Catholic Church and the spirit it serves (Luke 9:55) we invite you to read the articles ‘The Mystery Babylon’, ‘Popes and the Princes of This World’, ‘S.exual Abuse in the Churches’ and ‘S.exual Abuse – Vatican Involvement’ listed on our website http://www.aworlddeceived.ca

    All of the other pages and articles listed on our website explain how and by whom this whole world has been deceived as confirmed in Revelation 12:9.

    September 7, 2012 at 6:12 pm |
    • Joe

      More AvdBerg spam. Click the Report Abuse link. If enough of us do that, CNN will get on it.

      September 7, 2012 at 6:22 pm |

      This poster is a TROLL on this site and is only posting to sell their book and website which is a cult. They are a known liar on this site. Report them to their web hosting site since spamming is against the rules! Click the report abuse link to get rid of this TROLL!

      September 10, 2012 at 6:11 pm |
  5. Amniculi

    Excellent! So when is the castration? I would assume that that is the only logical punishment...

    September 7, 2012 at 4:43 pm |
    • Joe

      Such punishment should also be applied to spammers. AvdBerg is one such spammer; see the next post.

      September 7, 2012 at 6:23 pm |
  6. tuvia

    מלחמה בלתי נגמרת

    September 7, 2012 at 1:15 pm |
  7. tuvia




















    September 7, 2012 at 1:06 pm |
    • old ben

      This Jonathan Pollard is a traitor to the U.S. And a highly unstable lout to boot. Keep him locked up.

      September 7, 2012 at 1:16 pm |
  8. Doc Vestibule

    This behaviour is par for the course in the Catholic world.

    In 1962, The Vatican relased the 'Crimen Sollicitationis', which outlined how the church is to handle accusations of se.xual impropriety against clergy.
    The stickiest point for most people is that not only was the doc.ument itself Top Secret for decades, it explictly stated that anybody involved in this type of investigation, including the accuser and potential witnesses, are sworn to secrecy regarding any and all details, upon penalty of excommunication (a fate worse than death for the devout).
    This preoccupation with secrecy significantly slowed the investigative process – the backlog of referrals to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith for action against se.xually abusive priests is so large that it takes 18 months to get a reply.
    According to the John Jay report, 918 of 1872 (49%) substantiated allegations of abuse against Catholic clergy were addressed by sending the priest off for psychiatric counseling and then moving him to another parish, with nary a whisper to law enforcement. This number does not include priests relocated for reasons other than charges of se.xual impropriety.
    The Irish Commission to Inquire Into Child Abuse from 2009 came to the conclusion that ""the Dublin Archdiocese's pre-occupations in dealing with cases of child se.xual abuse, at least until the mid 1990s, were the maintenance of secrecy, the avoidance of scandal, the protection of the reputation of the Church, and the preservation of its as.sets. All other considerations, including the welfare of children and justice for victims, were subordinated to these priorities."

    September 7, 2012 at 11:02 am |
  9. tuvia






    September 7, 2012 at 10:46 am |
  10. tuvia






    September 7, 2012 at 10:45 am |
  11. Tom, Tom, the Other One

    The early church father Origen Adamantius set a good example that these priests should follow. He castrated himself to avoid sin (Matthew 19:12).

    September 7, 2012 at 9:13 am |
  12. William Demuth

    This pig needs to be is a cell so he can be buggered by some inmates.

    Dregs of the earth, a shining example of the Jesus cult at its finest.

    September 7, 2012 at 8:48 am |
    • Kathleen

      William you should know about the human condition. Therefore, stop blaming it on Jesus.

      September 7, 2012 at 10:31 am |
    • sam stone

      Kathleen: He didn't blame anything on Jesus, just the cult purporting to follow him

      September 8, 2012 at 11:55 am |
  13. hogwash Dao

    The punishment for the bishop is so light, looks like just a SLAP in the butt ;=)

    September 7, 2012 at 8:42 am |
  14. Colin

    Catholicism 101 Exam extract

    Who am I? I don’t pay any taxes. I never have. Any money my organization earns is tax free and my own salary is also tax free, at the federal, state and local level. Despite contributing nothing to society, but still enjoying all its benefits, I feel I have the right to tell others what to do. I am

    (a) A sleazy Wall Street banker

    (b) A mafia boss

    (c) A drug pusher; or

    (d) A Catholic Priest, Protestant Minister or Jewish Rabbi.

    What do the following authors all have in common – Jean Paul Sartre, Voltaire, Denis Diderot, Victor Hugo, Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Immanuel Kant, David Hume, René Descartes, Francis Bacon, John Milton, John Locke, and Blaise Pascal:

    (a) They are among the most gifted writers the World has known;

    (b) They concentrated on opposing dogma and opening the human mind and spirit to the wonders of free thought and intellectual freedom;

    (c) They were intimidated by the Catholic Church and put on the Church’s list of prohibited authors; or

    (d) All of the above.

    The AIDS epidemic will kill tens of millions in poor African and South American countries before we defeat it. Condoms are an effective way to curtail its spread. As the Pope still has significant influence over the less educated masses in these parts of the World, he has exercised this power by:

    (a) Using some of the Vatican’s incomprehensible wealth to educate these vulnerable people on health family planning and condom use;

    (b) Supporting government programs that distribute condoms to high risk groups;

    (c) Using its myriad of churches in these regions to distribute condoms; or

    (d) Scaring people into NOT using condoms, based upon his disdainful and aloof view that it is better that a person die than go against the Vatican’s position on contraceptive use.

    September 7, 2012 at 6:28 am |
    • Sheila

      It takes a fool to write your nonsense. Just because you don't care to understand Jesus' teachings, you don't need to keep shoving your antisocial personality on others.

      September 7, 2012 at 6:57 am |
    • TruthPrevails :-)

      Sheila: It takes a bigger fool to believe anything without evidence (faith). There is no verifiable evidence to support that your imaginary friend jesus or any other god ever existed. It is your gullibility that makes you weak minded enough to fall for this crap and not reside within the 21st century!

      September 7, 2012 at 7:08 am |
    • Honey Hush

      Or please share your understanding of jesus' teachings as you see them. We already know that you believe "jesus loves me this I know, cause the bible tells me so" that was brainwashed into your little mind. Please try, you can try can't you?

      September 7, 2012 at 7:22 am |
    • Reality

      The reality of se-x, contraception and STD/HIV control: – from an agnostic guy who enjoys intelligent se-x-

      Note: Some words hyphenated to defeat an obvious word filter. ...

      The Brutal Effects of Stupidity:

      : The failures of the widely used birth "control" methods i.e. the Pill (8.7% actual failure rate) and male con-dom (17.4% actual failure rate) have led to the large rate of abortions and S-TDs in the USA. Men and women must either recognize their responsibilities by using the Pill or co-ndoms properly and/or use safer methods in order to reduce the epidemics of abortion and S-TDs.- Failure rate statistics provided by the Gut-tmacher Inst-itute. Unfortunately they do not give the statistics for doubling up i.e. using a combination of the Pill and a condom.

      Added information before making your next move:

      from the CDC-2006

      "Se-xually transmitted diseases (STDs) remain a major public health challenge in the United States. While substantial progress has been made in preventing, diagnosing, and treating certain S-TDs in recent years, CDC estimates that approximately 19 million new infections occur each year, almost half of them among young people ages 15 to 24.1 In addition to the physical and psy-ch-ological consequences of S-TDs, these diseases also exact a tremendous economic toll. Direct medical costs as-sociated with STDs in the United States are estimated at up to $14.7 billion annually in 2006 dollars."

      And from:

      Consumer Reports, January, 2012

      "Yes, or-al se-x is se-x, and it can boost cancer risk-

      Here's a crucial message for teens (and all se-xually active "post-teeners": Or-al se-x carries many of the same risks as va-ginal se-x, including human papilloma virus, or HPV. And HPV may now be overtaking tobacco as the leading cause of or-al cancers in America in people under age 50.

      "Adolescents don’t think or-al se-x is something to worry about," said Bonnie Halpern-Felsher professor of pediatrics at the University of California, San Francisco. "They view it as a way to have intimacy without having 's-ex.'" (It should be called the Bill Clinton Syndrome !!)

      Obviously, political leaders in both parties, Planned Parenthood, parents, the "stupid part of the USA" and the educational system have failed miserably on many fronts.

      The most effective forms of contraception, ranked by "Perfect use":

      – (Abstinence, 0% failure rate)
      – (Masturbation, mono or mutual, 0% failure rate)

      Followed by:

      One-month injectable and Implant (both at 0.05 percent)
      Vasectomy and IUD (Mirena) (both at 0.1 percent)
      The Pill, Three-month injectable, and the Patch (all at 0.3 percent)
      Tubal sterilization (at 0.5 percent)
      IUD (Copper-T) (0.6 percent)
      Periodic abstinence (Post-ovulation) (1.0 percent)
      Periodic abstinence (Symptothermal) and Male condom (both at 2.0 percent)
      Periodic abstinence (Ovulation method) (3.0 percent)

      Every other method ranks below these, including Withdrawal (4.0), Female condom (5.0), Diaphragm (6.0), Periodic abstinence (calendar) (9.0), the Sponge (9.0-20.0, depending on whether the woman using it has had a child in the past), Cervical cap (9.0-26.0, with the same caveat as the Sponge), and Spermicides (18.0).

      September 7, 2012 at 7:34 am |
    • Reality

      Priests as all clergy pay federal taxes:

      "In the U.S., priests pay taxes on this salary as everyone else does. (Actually, priests pay more than their share as they have to pay both halves of social security... strangely enough, they are 'employees' with respect to federal and state taxes, but 'self employed' with respect to social security.) "

      Read more: http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_the_salary_of_a_Catholic_priest#ixzz25mcAlLUT

      To wit: From the IRS:

      "Topic 417 – Earnings for Clergy

      For income tax purposes, a licensed, commissioned, or ordained minister is generally treated as a common law employee of his or her church, denomination, or sect. There are, however, some exceptions such as traveling evangelists who may be treated as independent contractors. If you are a minister performing ministerial services, you are taxed on wages, offerings, and fees you receive for performing marriages, baptisms, funerals, etc.

      The services you perform in the exercise of your ministry are generally subject to self-employment tax (social security and Medicare taxes). See Publication 517, Social Security and Other Information for Members of the Clergy and Religious Workers, for limited exceptions from self-employment tax.

      Even though, for social security tax and Medicare tax purposes, you are considered a self-employed individual in performing your ministerial services, you may be considered an employee for income tax or retirement plan purposes. For income tax or retirement plan purposes, some of your income may be considered self-employment income and other income may be considered wages. Depending on all the facts and circu-mstances, under common-law rules you are considered either an employee or a self employed-person. Generally, you are an employee if the church or organization has the legal right to control both what you do and how you do it, even if you have considerable discretion and freedom of action. For more information about the common-law rules, see Publication 15-A (PDF), Employer's Supplemental Tax Guide. If you are employed by a congregation for a salary, you are generally a common-law employee and income from the exercise of your ministry is considered wages for income tax purposes. However, amounts received directly from members of the congregation, such as fees for performing marriages, baptisms, or other personal services, are considered self-employment income."

      September 7, 2012 at 7:40 am |
    • Kenneth

      Sheila, don't let the arrogant ones on this blog intimidate you with the weak mindedness argument they throw out. Weak mindedness has nothing to do with learning Jesus' truth. Arrogance and the superiority complexes on the part of nonbelievers prevents them from learning and practicing what Jesus teaches. These atheists desperately need help but are to arrogant to look into that fact.

      September 7, 2012 at 8:05 am |
    • William Demuth


      Weak minded?

      I have a 14 year old who has more education than your entire church combined.

      Scurry back to the 14th century little boy, and leave reality to those who can handle it.

      September 7, 2012 at 8:52 am |
    • Jesus didn't

      teach the priests what they did to those children was all right, did he? Or did jesus tell the bishop it might be a good idea to cover up the mess, the law of the church supercedes the law of the state, that sounds like Bill Deacon? My wife is just fine, thanks for caring. Just one more thing ken, the bishop wasn't covering up for you was he?

      September 7, 2012 at 8:58 am |
    • Kathleen

      Those priests are just as guilty as the atheists for not believing or understanding what Jesus' teaches.

      September 7, 2012 at 10:36 am |
    • sam stone

      Kenneth: Arrogant? Folks like you purport to know the likes and dislikes of "god", but it it the atheists who are arrogant? Go home, boy, and get your shinebox

      September 8, 2012 at 12:14 pm |
  15. Colin

    Please choose your favorite Catholic superst.ition from those below. For the one you choose, please say why it is any more ridiculous than the rest of the garbage Catholics swallow and give an example of a non-Catholic belief which is just as stupid.

    a. Grocery store bread and wine becomes the flesh and blood of a dead Jew from 2,000 years ago because a priest does some hocus pocus over it in church of a Sunday morning.

    b. When I pray for something like “please god help me pass my exam tomorrow,” an invisible being reads my mind and intervenes to alter what would otherwise be the course of history in small ways to meet my request.

    c. The entire Universe and its billions of galaxies were created about 6,000 years ago with one man, one woman and a talking snake.

    d. A god impregnated a virgin with himself, so he could give birth to himself and then sacrifice himself to himself to negate an “original sin” of a couple we now know never existed.

    September 7, 2012 at 5:17 am |
    • saggyroy

      None of the above. I like the one where demons churn the ocean of milk to create the earth. Oops not catholic, it's from Thailand. My bad.

      September 7, 2012 at 6:09 am |
    • Sheila

      Keep telling all of society what a fool you are.

      September 7, 2012 at 6:58 am |
    • TruthPrevails :-)

      Sheila: Where is he wrong? Now find a mirror and look in it...there you will see the real fool!

      September 7, 2012 at 7:09 am |
    • Kenneth

      I have the hunch that these atheists are single and will remain that way throughout their lives. If they are married, heaven help their spouses.

      September 7, 2012 at 8:08 am |
    • William Demuth


      I currently have a wife, a mistress and a girlfreind.

      Go back to your Priestly lover, and leave the woman to us.

      September 7, 2012 at 8:50 am |
    • Kathleen

      William, are you proud that you con women to be with you?

      September 7, 2012 at 10:39 am |
    • Doc Vestibule

      Catholics are not young earth creationists (anymore)
      It is official Church doctrine that the Young Earth belief is heresy and the universe's actual age is best determined by scientific observation of background radiation and other methods as developed by scientific knowledge over time. Church teaching does not have any opinion on the age of the universe - only that correct scientific observation of God's creation will be able to determine it.
      The Vatican even has an official astronomer named Guy Consolmagno.
      You're spot on with the rest of the absurd BS, however.

      I've been happily unmarried and raising a family with my partner for nigh on a decade.

      September 7, 2012 at 10:55 am |
    • evolvedDNA

      Kenneth.. look at the "love" around the world that the religious folks show each other...you can aspire to be an atheist but I fear that at this time you prefer the love of an mystic alien rather than real human beings for it to happen at this time. Your hope that atheists are unhappy is totally unfounded and based on the superior position religion holds for its self.

      September 7, 2012 at 12:40 pm |
    • Colin

      Doc- Can't say I am convinced. I understand that they have said that (in probably one of the greatest doctrinal about faces in history) but when you look at the official Catholic Catachism, it is still riddled with references to Adam and Eve, Noah and the other cast of mythical characters. Also, they still maintain the incarnation view that Jesus died to save us from original sin, no?

      Seems to me they are, at best, somewhere inbetween. Ceratinly the view has not percolated down to the masses. About 70% of Catholics in the USA deny evolution.

      September 8, 2012 at 11:01 am |
    • Chad

      @Colin " Also, they still maintain the incarnation view that Jesus died to save us from original sin, no?"
      @Chad "A. Do you know what original sin actually is?
      B. "Do you know what the actual position of the RCC is?

      no. you dont

      but, dont let that stop you! Never ceases to amaze me..

      September 8, 2012 at 11:08 am |
    • Tom, Tom, the Other One

      For what it's worth, Catholics do have a position on evolution as it applies to humans. Not sure where Adam and Eve etc. fit in:

      "Concerning biological evolution, the Church does not have an official position on whether various life forms developed over the course of time. However, it says that, if they did develop, then they did so under the impetus and guidance of God, and their ultimate creation must be ascribed to him.

      Concerning human evolution, the Church has a more definite teaching. It allows for the possibility that man’s body developed from previous biological forms, under God’s guidance, but it insists on the special creation of his soul. Pope Pius XII declared that "the teaching authority of the Church does not forbid that, in conformity with the present state of human sciences and sacred theology, research and discussions . . . take place with regard to the doctrine of evolution, in as far as it inquires into the origin of the human body as coming from pre-existent and living matter—[but] the Catholic faith obliges us to hold that souls are immediately created by God" (Pius XII, Humani Generis 36)"

      I think it's interesting Catholic thought may be retreating from the physical world. In the future all their claims may be on intangible things that aren't subject to argument.

      September 8, 2012 at 11:10 am |
    • Tom, Tom, the Other One

      Original Sin was believing and acting on the idea that we humans could be like the most high God. Who sinned first and when, Chad?

      September 8, 2012 at 11:15 am |
    • Chad

      @Tom, Tom, the Other One Original Sin was believing and acting on the idea that we humans could be like the most high God"

      =>hmm.. no..
      do some reading 🙂

      September 8, 2012 at 12:17 pm |
    • Colin

      The original original sin was as it appears in Genesis. Then science proved that to be hogwash. Then and only then, the squirming began. The RCC was in a bind because it got to the point that evolution was proven beyond all sane doubt but it was stuck with having so much of its doctrine built on the idea of Jesus dying to save us from original sin. So we see the squirming contiue to this day.

      September 8, 2012 at 1:15 pm |
    • Chad

      @Colin "The original original sin was as it appears in Genesis. Then science proved that to be hogwash. Then and only then, the squirming began. The RCC was in a bind because it got to the point that evolution was proven beyond all sane doubt but it was stuck with having so much of its doctrine built on the idea of Jesus dying to save us from original sin. So we see the squirming contiue to this day."

      @Chad "not even SORT of close..

      do you have any idea at all what the doctrine of original sin is? when it originated and with whom? what scripture it was based on?

      of course not..

      dont let that stop you though..

      September 8, 2012 at 5:17 pm |
    • YoozYerBrain

      The concept of Original Sin boiled down;

      "Since you were born, you are a sinner." You don't have to do anything bad, you ARE bad and the proof is.... you are here!

      Fvck you! My brand new baby grandchild is the perfect expression of perfect sacredness. NO SIN THERE, you bizarre mind-controlling fvckrs.

      September 8, 2012 at 5:42 pm |
    • Tom, Tom, the Other One

      Reading for Chad:


      September 8, 2012 at 5:54 pm |
    • Chad

      @Tom Tom..

      =>you even got THAT wrong..


      this is the one you want (the one on Original Sin)..

      look.. here's the thing. You need to actually READ it..

      September 8, 2012 at 5:58 pm |
    • Tom, Tom, the Other One

      I'm sorry Chad, that was lazy of me. This commentary caught my eye:

      It is not a sin to covet God's likeness as to knowledge, absolutely; but to covet this likeness inordinately, that is, above one's measure, this is a sin. Hence Augustine commenting on Psalm 70:18, "O God, who is like Thee?" says: "He who desires to be of himself, even as God is of no one, wishes wickedly to be like God. Thus did the devil, who was unwilling to be subject to Him, and man who refused to be, as a servant, bound by His command."

      September 8, 2012 at 6:00 pm |
    • Tom, Tom, the Other One

      Actually I did read your reference a while back. The one I dredged up touches on what the sin might have been, not simply that it was sin and was the origin of death.

      September 8, 2012 at 6:07 pm |
    • Chad

      @Tom, Tom, the Other One "I'm sorry Chad, that was lazy of me"

      =>I'm curious at what point you'll start thinking "man.. this is getting a bit ridiculous to get corrected on EVERY SINGLE comment I make regarding some point of Christian theology, I better either learn something of it, or be quiet about it"

      atheists have this trait of being extremely confident of something, without actually having any familiarity with it.
      You folks first form your view that God doesnt exist, then go searching for data to back it up..
      weird doesnt even come close to describing it (why you do it, and why your comfortable doing it..)

      September 8, 2012 at 6:08 pm |
    • Chad

      @Tom, Tom, the Other One " touches on what the sin might have been.."

      =>nope.. again. jeeze man

      Orginal sin may be taken to mean: (1) the sin that Adam committed; (2) a consequence of this first sin, the hereditary stain with which we are born on account of our origin or descent from Adam.
      From the earliest times the latter sense of the word was more common, as may be seen by St. Augustine's statement: "the deliberate sin of the first man is the cause of original sin" (De nupt. et concup., II, xxvi, 43). It is the hereditary stain that is dealt with here. As to the sin of Adam we have not to examine the circu mstances in which it was committed nor make the exegesis of the third chapter of Genesis.

      Original sin, also called ancestral sin,[1]is, according to a Christian theological doctrine, humanity's state of sin resulting from the fall of man.[2] This condition has been characterized in many ways, ranging from something as insignificant as a slight deficiency, or a tendency toward sin yet without collective guilt, referred to as a "sin nature", to something as drastic as total depravity or automatic guilt of all humans through collective guilt.[3]
      The concept of original sin was first developed in the 2nd century by Irenaeus, Bishop of Lyons in his controversy (written in Greek) with the dualist Gnostics.[2] Its scriptural foundation is based on the New Testament teaching of Paul the Apostle (Romans 5:12-21 and 1 Corinthians 15:22). Tertullian, Cyprian, Ambrose and Ambrosiaster considered that mankind shares in Adam's sin, transmitted by human generation. Augustine's formulation of original sin was popular among Reformers, such as Martin Luther and John Calvin who equated original sin with concupiscence, affirming that it persisted even after baptism and completely destroyed freedom.[2] Within Roman Catholicism, the Jansenist movement, which the Church then declared heretical, also maintained that original sin destroyed freedom of will.[4]

      learn the difference between the fall of man, and eating the apple.

      September 8, 2012 at 6:14 pm |
    • Tom, Tom, the Other One

      You seem perplexed, Chad. I had hoped you might present coherent, consistent Christian theology (at least of a kind acceptable to the people you learned it from). I don't think you've failed in that. You just never really get started. So chin up, Chad. Remember, we're all in this together.

      September 8, 2012 at 6:22 pm |
    • Tom, Tom, the Other One

      Augustine again: "the deliberate sin of the first man is the cause of original sin" Let's not duck, Chad. Let's look at the sin that was the cause.

      September 8, 2012 at 6:31 pm |
    • Chad

      @Tom, Tom, the Other One "You seem perplexed, ..."

      =>I do?
      about what?

      September 8, 2012 at 7:14 pm |
    • Tom, Tom, the Other One

      Chad seems perplexed: "You folks first form your view that God doesnt exist, then go searching for data to back it up..
      weird doesnt even come close to describing it (why you do it, and why your comfortable doing it..)"

      September 8, 2012 at 7:17 pm |
    • Chad

      ah, yes.
      I am perplexed as to why atheists do that..

      September 8, 2012 at 7:19 pm |
    • Tom, Tom, the Other One

      I don't know that I can represent atheists well, but let me give this a shot. God has to be introduced into an argument or a line inquiry for it to devolve into accusations that one is looking for evidence that God does not exist. How can I introduce God at all? If I'm to do so, first I need for God to be well-defined. Then I need evidence that God exists. Then I need for the involvement of God to be falsifiable. God doesn't ever really enter the picture, Chad.

      September 8, 2012 at 7:40 pm |
    • Tom, Tom, the Other One

      Anyway, let's circle back to my original question which I'll amend because of your objection to using "original sin" as a term for the first sin.

      Who sinned first and when, Chad?

      September 8, 2012 at 7:49 pm |
    • Chad

      @Tom, Tom, the Other One "I don't know that I can represent atheists well, ...."

      =>you lost me.. that was your attempt to explain why atheists are comfortable criticizing Christianity without knowing much at all about it?

      September 8, 2012 at 7:51 pm |
    • Tom, Tom, the Other One

      No, Chad. That was my response to what seemed to have you puzzled: "You folks first form your view that God doesnt exist, then go searching for data to back it up.."

      If it also bothers you that atheists criticize Christians, or "Christianity without knowing much at all about it" I can only guess that the atheists you are referring to feel they know the essential claims of Christianity and reject them. If they go further and make uninformed statements, well that's unfortunate.

      September 8, 2012 at 8:37 pm |
    • Chad

      @TTTOO "feel they know the essential claims of Christianity and reject them. If they go further and make uninformed statements, well that's unfortunate."

      =>indeed, as you have shown, unfortunate..

      September 8, 2012 at 11:38 pm |
    • Tom, Tom, the Other One

      Chad, I guess this is where I'm expected to slap you around a bit. Not really my style.

      I've noticed your posts (to everyone) are becoming shorter, less informative and more combative. No worry. We'll get you through this, Chad. Remember. We're all in this together.

      Anyway, let's circle back to my original question which I'll amend because of your objection to using "original sin" as a term for the first sin.

      Who sinned first and when, Chad?

      September 9, 2012 at 7:16 am |
    • Chad

      @Tom, Tom, the Other One "Anyway, let's circle back to my original question which I'll amend because of your objection to using "original sin" as a term for the first sin.
      @Chad "one thing I notice about you, is your great love of flitting from topic to topic, without ever gaining any understanding of the position you propose to debate..


      first, do you now understand what "original sin" was? Who/When it was formulated, and upon what scripture it was based?

      September 9, 2012 at 1:36 pm |
    • Tom, Tom, the Other One

      Chad, I'm sorry if my insistence on returning to the original question is annoying, but I think we should return to the original question. Who sinned first and when?

      September 9, 2012 at 1:51 pm |
    • Chad

      no doubt 🙂

      your stubborn insistence that it's possible to debate a position you know nothing of is actually quite remarkable.

      what do you have to loose? think of all the ammo you will get!!!


      Do you now understand what "original sin" was? Who/When it was formulated, and upon what scripture it was based?

      September 9, 2012 at 1:57 pm |
    • Tom, Tom, the Other One

      The question regards the first sin (of man, let's not try to execute a segue into the history of Satan). The cause of original sin as Augustine put it. I know of particular references in the Bible to the first sin, but my interpretations of them would lead to digressions. You were invited to answer the question. Who sinned first and when?

      September 9, 2012 at 2:39 pm |
    • Chad

      I will discuss a topic with someone that has an understanding of it and can discuss it reasonably intelligently

      I will not answer a never ending series of strawman with someone who's only interest is to keep me typing as long as possible.

      It is entirely up to you..

      to proceed to the next topic, we need to close on the first: Do you now understand what "original sin" was? Who/When it was formulated, and upon what scripture it was based?

      September 9, 2012 at 2:59 pm |
    • Tom, Tom, the Other One

      Never mind, Chad. I'm surrounded by priests most days and I can certainly discuss it with one of them as I have in the past. Good luck to you. Ad Maiorem Dei Gloriam

      September 9, 2012 at 4:14 pm |
    • Chad

      that is exactly what I thought was happening.

      September 9, 2012 at 4:55 pm |
    • Rufus T. Firefly

      Chad "your stubborn insistence that it's possible to debate a position you know nothing of is actually quite remarkable."

      Oh my, Chad, the ironyof you uttering those words is almost physically painful.

      September 9, 2012 at 5:05 pm |
  16. Atheism is not healthy for children and other living things

    Prayer changes things

    September 7, 2012 at 4:32 am |
    • TruthPrevails :-)

      Wrong again!!! It causes death!

      September 7, 2012 at 7:04 am |
    • hal 9000

      I'm sorry "Atheism is not healthy for children and other living things", but you assertions regarding atheism and prayer are unfounded. I see that you repeat these unfounded statements with high frequency. Perhaps the following book might help you overcome this problem:

      I'm Told I Have Dementia: What You Can Do... Who You Can Turn to...
      by the Alzheimer's Disease Society

      September 7, 2012 at 10:40 am |
  17. AvdBerg

    For a better understanding of the s.exual abuse and the history of the Catholic Church and the spirit it serves (Luke 9:55) we invite you to read the articles ‘The Mystery Babylon’, ‘Popes and the Princes of This World’, ‘S.exual Abuse in the Churches’ and ‘S.exual Abuse – Vatican Involvement’ listed on our website http://www.aworlddeceived.ca

    All of the other pages and articles listed on our website explain how and by whom this whole world has been deceived as confirmed in Revelation 12:9.

    September 7, 2012 at 12:11 am |
  18. I see Judge Wimpwuss really cracked down

    Failed to report CHILD MOLESTATION and the punishment is two years of . . . nothing?

    The poor bishop – whatever will he do during his time in not-jail?

    September 6, 2012 at 10:34 pm |
  19. tuvia


    September 6, 2012 at 9:17 pm |
    • Fluffy the Gerbil of Doom

      There is no god. Yahweh is a myth. Get over it. Move on. Grow up.

      September 6, 2012 at 9:24 pm |
    • old ben

      BS. And get a haircut.

      September 6, 2012 at 9:48 pm |
    • Chick-a-dee

      The city of Jerusalem is significant in a number of religious traditions, including Abrahamic religions Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, which consider it a holy city.  (The following all cut/pasted from Wikipedia.)

      Jerusalem in Judaism
      Since the 10th century BCE Jerusalem has been the holiest city, focus and spiritual center of the Jewish people:

          "Israel was first forged into a unified nation from Jerusalem some three thousand years ago, when King David seized the crown and united the twelve tribes from this city... For a thousand years Jerusalem was the seat of Jewish sovereignty, the household site of kings, the location of its legislative councils and courts. In exile, the Jewish nation came to be identified with the city that had been the site of its ancient capital. Jews, wherever they were, prayed for its restoration." Roger Friedland, Richard D. Hecht. To Rule Jerusalem, University of California Press, 2000, p. 8. ISBN 0-520-22092-7
          "The Jewish bond to Jerusalem was never broken. For three milennia, Jerusalem has been the center of the Jewish faith, retaining its symbolic value throughout the generations." Jerusalem- the Holy City, Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs, February 23, 2003. Accessed March 24, 2007.
          "The centrality of Jerusalem to Judaism is so strong that even secular Jews express their devotion and attachment to the city and cannot conceive of a modern State of Israel without it... For Jews Jerusalem is sacred simply because it exists... Though Jerusalem's sacred character goes back three millennia...". Leslie J. Hoppe. The Holy City:Jerusalem in the theology of the Old Testament, Liturgical Press, 2000, p. 6. ISBN 0-8146-5081-3
          "Ever since King David made Jerusalem the capital of Israel 3,000 years ago, the city has played a central role in Jewish existence." Mitchell Geoffrey Bard, The Complete Idiot's Guide to the Middle East Conflict, Alpha Books, 2002, p. 330. ISBN 0-02-864410-7
          "For Jews the city has been the pre-eminent focus of their spiritual, cultural, and national life throughout three millennia." Yossi Feintuch, U.S. Policy on Jerusalem, Greenwood Publishing Group, 1987, p. 1. ISBN 0-313-25700-0
          "Jerusalem became the center of the Jewish people some 3,000 years ago" Moshe Maʻoz, Sari Nusseibeh, Jerusalem: Points of Friction – And Beyond, Brill Academic Publishers, 2000, p. 1. ISBN 90-411-8843-6
          "The Jewish people are inextricably bound to the city of Jerusalem. No other city has played such a dominant role in the history, politics, culture, religion, national life and consciousness of a people as has Jerusalem in the life of Jewry and Judaism. Since King David established the city as the capital of the Jewish state circa 1000 BCE, it has served as the symbol and most profound expression of the Jewish people's identi.ty as a nation." [1] Jerusalem has long been embedded into Jewish religious consciousness and Jews have always studied and personalized the struggle by King David to capture Jerusalem and his desire to build the Jewish temple there, as described in the Book of Samuel and the Book of Psalms. Many of King David's yearnings about Jerusalem have been adapted into popular prayers and songs. Jews believe that in the future Jerusalem will become the center of worship and instruction for all mankind and consequently become the spiritual capital of the world.

      Jerusalem in Christianity
      For Christians, Jerusalem's place in the ministry of Jesus and the Apostolic Age, as recorded in the New Testament, gives it great importance, in addition to its place in the Old Testament, the Hebrew Bible. According to the New Testament, Jerusalem was the city to which Jesus was brought as a child, to be presented at the Temple (Luke 2:22) and to attend festivals (Luke 2:41). According to the Canonical gospels, Jesus preached and healed in Jerusalem, especially in the Temple Courts. Jerusalem historian Dan Mazar reported in a series of articles in the Jerusalem Christian Review on the archaeological discoveries made at this location by his grandfather, Prof. Benjamin Mazar, which included the 1st century stairs of ascent, where Jesus and his disciples preached, as well as the "mikvaot" (or baptismals) used by both Jewish and Christian pilgrims. The events of Pentacost, which are recorded in the New Testament Book of Acts, also took place at this location. There is also an account of Jesus' cleansing of the Temple at the Temple Court, chasing various traders out of the sacred precincts (Mark 11:15, see also Mark 11). Much of this area was also uncovered by the excavations conducted by the elder Mazar. At the end of each of the Gospels, there are accounts of Jesus' Last Supper in an "Upper Room" in Jerusalem, his arrest in Gethsemane, his trial, his crucifixion at Golgotha, his burial nearby and his resurrection and ascension and prophecy to return. Tradition holds that the place of the Last Supper is the Cenacle, on the second floor of a building on Mount Zion where David's Tomb is on the first floor. Archaeologist Bargil Pixner[2] claims to have found three walls of the original structure still extant today. The place of Jesus' anguished prayer and betrayal, Gethsemane, is probably somewhere near the Church of All Nations on the Mount of Olives. Jesus' trial before Pontius Pilate may have taken place at the Antonia Fortress, to the north of the Temple area. Popularly, the exterior pavement where the trial was conducted is beneath the Convent of the Sisters of Zion. Other Christians believe that Pilate tried Jesus at Herod's Palace on Mount Zion.

      The Via Dolorosa, or way of suffering, is the traditional route to Golgotha, the place of crucifixion, and is an important pilgrimage. The route ends at the Church of the Holy Sepulchre (perhaps the most holy place for Christians). The Holy Sepulchre is traditionally believed to be the location of Golgotha and Jesus' nearby tomb. The original church was built in 336 by Constantine I. The Garden Tomb is a popular pilgrimage site near the Damascus Gate. It was suggested by Charles George Gordon that this site, rather than the Holy Sepulchre, is the true place of Golgotha. The Acts of the Apostles and Pauline Epistles show James the Just, the brother of Jesus, as leader of the early Jerusalem church. He and his successors were the focus for Jewish Christians until the destruction of the city by Emperor Hadrian in 135. The exclusion of Jews from the new city of Aelia Capitolina meant that gentile bishops were appointed under the authority of the Metropolitans of Caesarea and, ultimately, the Patriarchs of Antioch. The general significance of Jerusalem to Christians outside the Holy Land entered a period of decline during the Persecution of Christians in the Roman Empire but resumed again c.325 when Emperor Constantine I and his mother, Helena, endowed Jerusalem with churches and shrines, making it the foremost centre of Christian pilgrimage, see also Constantine I and Christianity. Helena is remembered as the Patron Saint of Archaeologists and (according to the church historian Socrates of Constantinople[3]) claimed to have found (with the assistance of Bishop Macarius of Jerusalem) the Cross of Christ, after removing a Temple to Venus that had been built over the site. Jerusalem received special recognition in Canon VII of Nicaea in 325, without yet becoming a metropolitan see.[4] The traditional founding date for the Brotherhood of the Holy Sepulchre (which guards the Christian Holy places in the Holy Land) is 313 which corresponds with the date of the Edict of Milan which legalized Christianity in the Roman Empire. The Council of Chalcedon in 451 raised the Bishop of Jerusalem to the rank of patriarch, together with Rome, Constantinople, Alexandria and Antioch, forming the Pentarchy. However, Byzantine politics meant that Jerusalem simply passed from the Syrian jurisdiction of Antioch to the Greek authorities in Constantinople. For centuries, Greek clergy dominated the Jerusalem church. Meanwhile, the Roman church never accepted the Pentarchy and instead claimed primacy.

      Jerusalem in Islam
      The al-Aqsa masjid in Jerusalem is built on the site of the second place of worship ('Masjid' in Arabic) built by man, after the Masjid al-Haram in Makkah. Al-Aqsa is the third holiest site in Sunni Islam after the mosques of al-Haram in Mecca and al-Nabawi in Medina.[1]

          It is strongly associated with the Biblical prophets David, Solomon, Elijah and Jesus.
          It was the first direction of prayer in Islam, before the Kaaba in Mecca
          According to the Quran Muhammad was taken by the miraculous steed Buraq to visit the Farthest Mosque (which many Muslims believe is the Al Aqsa Mosque in Jerusalem), where he prayed, and was then taken to heaven, in a single night in the year 620 This event is known as Isra wal Mi'raj, in Islamic tradition.

      September 7, 2012 at 2:31 am |
    • Kenneth

      Chick-a-dee, I don't know where to begin with how wrong the information you printed is.

      September 7, 2012 at 8:15 am |
  20. tuvia



    September 6, 2012 at 9:16 pm |
    • Fluffy the Gerbil of Doom


      September 6, 2012 at 9:24 pm |
    • Chick-a-dee

      Now that we've established than the city is important to all the people's of Abraham, can we remember that sharing is something we all should have learned before we turned 5 years old?...And then, can we get back to discussing the posted topic instead of your inserted tangent? This clip appears as an insert into not just this but a number of other threads – none of which have anything to do with your video's topic.

      September 7, 2012 at 2:35 am |
    • Kenneth

      The topic is and always will be how arrogant you atheists are.

      September 7, 2012 at 8:16 am |
    • EvolvedDNA

      Kenneth...well it comes from having a better understanding of life than you do, coupled with our lack of fear of a tyrannical alien in the afterlife.

      September 7, 2012 at 11:34 pm |
1 2
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.