Gay Priests? Gay Pastors?

[Tiger]

They are becoming more and more common and the majority of churches are voting to let them have the pulpit.

The reasoning behind it is that all persons are sinners - every priest and pastor - so why not allow gays to minister?

Much to the consternation of the stricter churches - it is a changin'.

"Conservatives are losing ground. Some of their protesting at this point is sort of that last gasp."



http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/134312729_clergy01m.html

Being a gay pastor in a Christian church is antithetical.

I would say any sect or division of Christianity that can't decide if homosexuality is wrong is not the church of Jesus Christ.

[Persephone]

I remember a time not so long ago when most churches considered divorce a sin. They certainly considered remarriage a sin. Now the pulpits of America are full of preachers on their second and third rounds of "Holy Matrimony."

The church changes to reflect society, not the other way around.

I remember a time not so long ago when most churches considered divorce a sin. They certainly considered remarriage a sin. Now the pulpits of America are full of preachers on their second and third rounds of "Holy Matrimony."

The church changes to reflect society, not the other way around.


Then you would be better off joining the Lion's Club.

No thanks, I'm full.

[arod]

They are becoming more and more common and the majority of churches are voting to let them have the pulpit.

The reasoning behind it is that all persons are sinners - every priest and pastor - so why not allow gays to minister?

It makes sense to have as a pastor somebody who, if he isn't sinless, at least doesn't count his sins as God-given.

Last gasp my ass. There will always be worshippers who deal with God's word as it was given regardless of liberal interpretation, justification and backsliding. If there is ever an apparent last gasp for them it will only be the sound of basement doors closing as they take their worship underground again.

[archangel]

Anything that is positive toward the expediency of Salvation is a good thing.

Shouldn't gays go to Heaven? It is not like they will sin when they get there is it?

Shouldn't they be represented spiritually?

I recommend heterosexuality...however, it is better to be gay and go to Heaven than "straight" and not.

Anything that is positive toward the expediency of Salvation is a good thing.

Enough with the Thesaurus already, okay? Jesus fucking Christ. ::)

Anything that is positive toward the expediency of Salvation is a good thing.

Shouldn't gays go to Heaven? It is not like they will sin when they get there is it?

Shouldn't they be represented spiritually?

I recommend hetero ...however, it is better to be gay and go to Heaven than "straight" and not.


One need only differentiate between tendency and actions. We all have a tendency toward sin of one kind or another...actually innumerable kinds if we're honest with ourselves. Having a homo pastor who utterly abstains from indulging his predelictions is no different from any other pastor who abstains from sin to the best of his ability.

However, I do agree with Arod that one might be opening a Pandora's box by making the spiritual leader someone who considers his predelictions God-given.

[archangel]

Enough with the Thesaurus already, okay? Jesus fucking Christ. ::)


I just try to interject my own brand of illumination...which is only a practice that I hope to get better at someday.

[archangel]

One need only differentiate between tendency and actions. We all have a tendency toward sin of one kind or another...actually innumerable kinds if we're honest with ourselves. Having a homo pastor who utterly abstains from indulging his predelictions is no different from any other pastor who abstains from sin to the best of his ability.

However, I do agree with Arod that one might be opening a Pandora's box by making the spiritual leader someone who considers his predelictions God-given.


I understand your point of view. Seems the gender-ID problem is only getting worse...I do not know if the problem will be solved anytime soon. More likely that it will merely become 'more acceptable'.

It is also known by some that the biggest sinners often make the best ministers. One who becomes a Priest or Nun because they have no life can do a good job...yet, for example, it has been witnessed that a woman who joins a Convent to avoid prosecution generally does some amazing things. They stick out like a sore thumb and think that no-one is aware.

They don't call it a "Con-Vent" for nothing. ;D

I understand your point of view. Seems the gender-ID problem is only getting worse...I do not know if the problem will be solved anytime soon. More likely that it will merely become 'more acceptable'.

I don't believe that the problem has become worse at all. I believe that the human race contains the same relative percentage of deviants as it always has. Our culture has merely emboldened them just as many cultures have before.

It is also known by some that the biggest sinners often make the best ministers.

Known by whom? More of your enlightened elders with secret knowledge perhaps? I'm not saying this statement is or isn't true but I don't know it to be relevant at all. One's past doesn't necessarily have any bearing on one's ability to minister effectively in the present.

One who becomes a Priest or Nun because they have no life can do a good job...yet, for example, it has been witnessed that a woman who joins a Convent to avoid prosecution generally does some amazing things.

Witnessed by whom?

They stick out like a sore thumb and think that no-one is aware. They don't call it a "Con-Vent" for nothing. ;D


You've been watching Sister Act haven't you? If you have some credible source for these observations on convents, nuns and criminals I'd certainly love to see a link.

[CaptainKirk]

if recent histoi refreshes our collective memory...numerous RC priests have been boning their way through decades of pre-pubescent and adolescent altar boys........

and until recently, have rarely been disciplined by the RC bureaucracy..whose sole intent has been maintaining the church infrastructure.......

translation....cha ching !!!!!cha ching!!!!!

one of the reasons many altar boys have always had their hair parted in the middle .....from the fond outward stroking motion of the priestly hands on their hair while in the kneeling rest position........

Im not the RC churchhead in the fam...wifey is and is indignant about the decades of priestly transgressions.....

whenever she insists they should be exposed and do hard time-with an eager cellmate named Tyrone...I have to jolt her back to the business aspects of cash flow.....

church style.........

pass those plates and I don' wanna hear no tinkeling, only the kind that folds.............! :D

[sinceabout]

Well bless my little schismatic heart, but when someone has his own particular boat to float he ought to go start his own church.

Or join an established one such as The Metropolitan Community Church (http://www.ufmcc.com/).

From what other church can you buy this online-->

http://www.mcc-store.com/images/products/graphics/rs/BO001.jpg

[archangel]

I don't believe that the problem has become worse at all. I believe that the human race contains the same relative percentage of deviants as it always has. Our culture has merely emboldened them just as many cultures have before.Known by whom? More of your enlightened elders with secret knowledge perhaps? I'm not saying this statement is or isn't true but I don't know it to be relevant at all. One's past doesn't necessarily have any bearing on one's ability to minister effectively in the present.Witnessed by whom?You've been watching Sister Act haven't you? If you have some credible source for these observations on convents, nuns and criminals I'd certainly love to see a link.


Worse or not...it has not become better. It is just another channel of human deviation.

It comes from Nuns and Priests in charge of Convents. Where else would it come from?

I have seen "Sister Act"...now that you mention it.

[lgllady]

There should be gay priests and pastors. Just as well, people should be afforded an opportunity to attend a church service where there isn't a gay priest or pastor. If a church is ambiguous, they could have "gay" services and "straight" services. Many churches particularly around here, have only spanish speaking services, only Korean, or Tagalog speaking services. If gays want gay attuned pastors, why not give them their gay service.

But for the simple sake of courtesy and consideration of others, they should have straight priests and pastors too.

[Larry_Oldtimer]

I remember a time not so long ago when most churches considered divorce a sin. They certainly considered remarriage a sin. Now the pulpits of America are full of preachers on their second and third rounds of "Holy Matrimony."

The church changes to reflect society, not the other way around.

Ah, but: The Christian sects, all, have as their "great authority" the Holy Bible, and insist that both the Old Testament and the New Testament are the "word of God". These books are the very foundation of their religion. Without this "Godly" authority to depend on, they would have to admit that what they believe in changes over time, and therefore is a matter of temporal opinion without the authority of God. Or, since their modern beliefs are in serious conflict with the Bible, make the case that God was wrong the first time. (No joke. If you want to get Muslims riled up, point out to them that Mohammed rewrote significant portions of the Quron. They take serious offence at the suggestion that their perceived to be perfect Mohammad got it wrong the first time.) This they won't do. Without this authority of God backing them up, their religion has no claim better than Paganism, Wicca or the like. It would be then only, "what I believe is more sensible than what you believe" which is where they don't want to go. It is a lot easier to rely on some authority than it is to offer convincing proof of something.

This ordination of gay priests presents another conundrum, as the priests ordained or proposed to be ordained are practicing homosexuals in most cases. One can talk forgiveness, IF the person has repented and no longer commits a particular sin. These priests continue to "sin" and speak not of repentance. It is sort of like, would you approve of a practicing criminal being the Chief of Police? Or a practicing arsonist being the Fire Chief? I think not. Either the Old Testament (and therefore the "word of God") was in serious error, or they themselves are in serious error. And if the Old Testament was in error in this case, where else is it in error? It can no longer be used as an authority if that is acknowledged. There are no two ways to have it.

Well bless my little schismatic heart, but when someone has his own particular boat to float he ought to go start his own church.

Or join an established one such as The Metropolitan Community Church (http://www.ufmcc.com/).

From what other church can you buy this online-->

http://www.mcc-store.com/images/products/graphics/rs/BO001.jpg


GLBT Christians. I've seen GLBT Pagans and GLBT Unitarians, but never GLBT Christians. Though, I have to admit, I prefer solid colour boas. Black and silver or green and black (for St. Pat's Day) are the only two-tone boas I like.

[the bib]

author=Tiger The reasoning behind it is that all persons are sinners - every priest and pastor - so why not allow gays to minister?

Short answer: Look at the scandals w/the pederast & pedophile priests in the RCC.

Hetero (predators) don't prey on BOYS.....

...... predators DO seek position of power and trust over their victims; clergy --- any denomination is therefore a natural choice for them ....

it would appear then,

that as the RCC is cleaning up its act,

the others have not learned the lesson and seem to being going down an already proven painful and perverted path. :-\

[the bib]

I remember a time not so long ago when most churches considered divorce a sin. They certainly considered remarriage a sin. Now the pulpits of America are full of preachers on their second and third rounds of "Holy Matrimony."



I disagree Suth ... the RCC fits the former (not the latter) part of your profile.

History shows that the Anglican Church was started in no small way due to King Henry's rift w/Rome, his inability to get a divorce or annulment ...

..... divorce has been allowed in Prostestantism since its inception almost 400 hears ago.

The church changes to reflect society, not the other way around.

I find myself again in disagreement: The RCC has not changed in doctrine or dogma ... vis a vis divorce or homosexuality OR ANYTHING really, (not eating meat on Friday's was never a donctrinal demand only an option that most American/European Catholics followed .... seldom followed anywhere else.)

It is the ever metamorphing Protestant construct that changes ... and for the ones who refuse the change or insist on change that doesn;t come ... well, they just start another sect. ;)

[the bib]

Anything that is positive toward the expediency of Salvation is a good thing.

Shouldn't gays go to Heaven? It is not like they will sin when they get there is it?

Shouldn't they be represented spiritually?

I recommend heterosexuality...however, it is better to be gay and go to Heaven than "straight" and not.


Hate the sin, love the sinner.

God made us all, homosexuals included.

Each has their own cross to bear ... and overcome.

If someone is a murderous sociopath who cannot control his propensity, does it follow that "God made him that way and he could be a pastor?"

.... if such a person were to control the propensity and NOT kill ... welll the issue would not arise, people culd not read his mind, he would be sincerely rejecting his "natural propensities" ... or his own "cross" and in so doing be pastor material.

If a homosexual were to reject his propensities ... IOW bear his cross and not partake in what is, in Christiandom considered sinful activity ... well then, again, the issue does not come up ... he can be a pastor.

It is the wanton sinning and refusal to amend the sinful ways which precludes the homosexual or killer from serving as pastor.

Pastors afterall are supposed to be EXAMPLES and leaders ....

not "sinners & so what!"

Think about it ... he would need preach either ...

"I'm a sinner, you're a sinner ... it's what we do......"

or just as bad,

"Do as I say, not as I do!"

[the bib]

I understand your point of view. Seems the gender-ID problem is only getting worse...I do not know if the problem will be solved anytime soon. More likely that it will merely become 'more acceptable'.

It is also known by some that the biggest sinners often make the best ministers. One who becomes a Priest or Nun because they have no life can do a good job...yet, for example, it has been witnessed that a woman who joins a Convent to avoid prosecution generally does some amazing things. They stick out like a sore thumb and think that no-one is aware.

They don't call it a "Con-Vent" for nothing. ;D


There is one thing I just don;t GET.

WHY is it that people have to be introduced and defined by their sexual preference????

I'm hetero but I don't identify myself or ply my character, personality, identity, qualifications or quality as a person ....

by WHOM I bed!!!!

I just really don;t understand ANYONE"S need to be regarded by their sexual identity BEFORE their human one. ???

[the bib]

if recent histoi refreshes our collective memory...numerous RC priests have been boning their way through decades of pre-pubescent and adolescent altar boys........

and until recently, have rarely been disciplined by the RC bureaucracy..whose sole intent has been maintaining the church infrastructure.......

translation....cha ching !!!!!cha ching!!!!!

one of the reasons many altar boys have always had their hair parted in the middle .....from the fond outward stroking motion of the priestly hands on their hair while in the kneeling rest position........

Im not the RC churchhead in the fam...wifey is and is indignant about the decades of priestly transgressions.....

whenever she insists they should be exposed and do hard time-with an eager cellmate named Tyrone...I have to jolt her back to the business aspects of cash flow.....

church style.........

pass those plates and I don' wanna hear no tinkeling, only the kind that folds.............! :D


Would only comment that they'd probably ENJOY Tyrone ... better to put them in with Hillery! ;)

[the bib]

since ... THAT WAS FUNNY! thanks for the belly laugh!

[the bib]

Worse or not...it has not become better. It is just another channel of human deviation.

It comes from Nuns and Priests in charge of Convents. Where else would it come from?

1.) Priests DON'T LIVE in convents ... they live in rectories.

2.) By vast majority and thoughout recorded time by a VAST majority, the DEVIANTS have been male...... ... WHY are you dragging the virginal nuns into it? ::)

3.) ..............
and speaking statistically by ratio clergy are MUCH LESS likely to be "diviant" then the general MALE population. IOW, YOU by virtue of NOT being clergy are statisically MORE likely to be a pervert than any given clergyman.

3.) Your ignorance is showing when you can draw such a ridiclous conclusion.



I have seen "Sister Act"...now that you mention it.


... please keep in mind that it was "fiction" and comedy .... and although rather entertaining and funny, has no real bearing on the topic.

[truelies]

They are becoming more and more common and the majority of churches are voting to let them have the pulpit.

The reasoning behind it is that all persons are sinners - every priest and pastor - so why not allow gays to minister?

Much to the consternation of the stricter churches - it is a changin'. http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/134312729_clergy01m.html


Of course (in Christian Theology) everyone is a Sinner. The problem with homosexual clergy would be (typically) the unwillingness to admit that the homosexual acts are Sin (again in terms of Christian ethics). A self proclaimed ongoing unrepentant hetro adulterer would be accepted as clergy in very few churches. Same sort of thing here. In either case a person who has the urges but admits them to be wrong (in terms of Christian ethics) would be a much more difficult case to deal with. In most protestant churches a 'putting a fence around the Law' approach is taken of allowing only married men into positions of leadership to avoid these gray cases. Unfortunately married men fuck up on occassion also as no one is perfect.

[the bib]

Of course (in Christian Theology) everyone is a Sinner. The problem with homosexual clergy would be (typically) the unwillingness to admit that the homosexual acts are Sin (again in terms of Christian ethics). A self proclaimed ongoing unrepentant hetro adulterer would be accepted as clergy in very few churches. Same sort of thing here. In either case a person who has the urges but admits them to be wrong (in terms of Christian ethics) would be a much more difficult case to deal with. In most protestant churches a 'putting a fence around the Law' approach is taken of allowing only married men into positions of leadership to avoid these gray cases. Unfortunately married men fuck up on occassion also as no one is perfect.


... unmarried men, too! ;D

I'll never forget the sermon in which our pastor preached about the 3 reasons for getting a divorce (for the uninitiated the Bible gives 2). I don't know how many or how few in the congregation caught the discrepancy but that was his last sermon and he was dismissed from office shortly thereafter. The bottom line is that he was unhappy in his marriage, had found someone else, and wanted out...with God's blessings we can assume. He had an agenda involving what he knew to be actions contrary to the Bible so he modified the Biblical precepts to suit himself. I do not and would not belong to a church that would allow that sort of thing. End of story.

[Lazarus]

Gay Bishops? God save us!

[archangel]

1.) Priests DON'T LIVE in convents ... they live in rectories.

2.) By vast majority and thoughout recorded time by a VAST majority, the DEVIANTS have been male...... ... WHY are you dragging the virginal nuns into it? ::)

3.) ..............
and speaking statistically by ratio clergy are MUCH LESS likely to be "diviant" then the general MALE population. IOW, YOU by virtue of NOT being clergy are statisically MORE likely to be a pervert than any given clergyman.

3.) Your ignorance is showing when you can draw such a ridiclous conclusion.... please keep in mind that it was "fiction" and comedy .... and although rather entertaining and funny, has no real bearing on the topic.


1) I referred to nuns and priests in charge...I mentioned nothing about where they lived.

2) You are assuming that all females who enter a convent are virgins. Mine is not sexist...all are sinners...not just males.

3) I was simply addressing the issue of those of the clergy who HAVE commited the devience. It was not a comparison.

3) Try reading it again and understand my true meaning. I am not a good conversationalist or writer, so there can be mis-understandings.

[the bib]

1) I referred to nuns and priests in charge...I mentioned nothing about where they lived.

Yes you did, on page 2:


Worse or not...it has not become better. It is just another channel of human deviation.

It comes from Nuns and Priests in charge of Convents. Where else would it come from?

I have seen "Sister Act"...now that you mention it.



archangel

2) You are assuming that all females who enter a convent are virgins. Mine is not sexist...all are sinners...not just males.

I mispoke, I meant to say "chaste."




3) I was simply addressing the issue of those of the clergy who HAVE commited the devience. It was not a comparison.

3) Try reading it again and understand my true meaning. I am not a good conversationalist or writer, so there can be mis-understandings.


I said nothing when you implied that it was common for nuns to enter in order to escape prosecution from the law.

My comments are for educational purposes as yours belie a distinct need for accurate info regards the RCC.

My comments are for educational purposes as yours belie a distinct need for accurate info regards the RCC.

Sometimes you absolutely slay me Bib. ;D

[lgllady]

It is an abomination that gays are demanding that others change their beliefs to suit their cause. This erzatz bishop is not a sinner who is not sinning. He is currently living in a homosexual relationship with another man. He left his wife and children to live with this man.

While his actions are personal and do not affect anyone else, his demand that everyone else in the church believe the same way he does is plain flat out evil. I hope that all those who disagree leave this church to its future as a homosexual church and form their own.

Well, obviously this "man" has proven to his diocese, the bishops and his Cardinal that he is a man of God or they wouldn't have ordained him to begin with.

[Tiger]

It is an abomination that gays are demanding that others change their beliefs to suit their cause. This erzatz bishop is not a sinner who is not sinning. He is currently living in a homosexual relationship with another man. He left his wife and children to live with this man.

While his actions are personal and do not affect anyone else, his demand that everyone else in the church believe the same way he does is plain flat out evil. I hope that all those who disagree leave this church to its future as a homosexual church and form their own.




He is NOT demanding that everyone think as he does - only that they suspend judgement - something the Bible also asks.

But I. like you, also hope that the ones who do not accept him leave the church - it would make for a much better church and the fools that leave can form their own hateful church - or join one of the ones already operating. There are a goodly number of them.

But these are the same fools who threatened to leave in the 70s when they voted to ordain women. Losers all. Fools all. I spit on them.

[arod]

Well, obviously this "man" has proven to his diocese, the bishops and his Cardinal that he is a man of God or they wouldn't have ordained him to begin with.


May their God strangle on His own excrement.

[Tiger]

May their God strangle on His own excrement.




Same God as the one the fearful, judgemental folks follow. ;)



Only the ones who voted to be tolerant actually understood Jesus' message. The others just wish they did.

[arod]

Same God as the one the fearful, judgemental folks follow. ;)



Only the ones who voted to be tolerant actually understood Jesus' message. The others just wish they did.

You're not making sense. You say they follow the same God as the thumpers, but that they understand Jesus' message and the thumpers don't. His message is not understood by either extreme.

[I-RIGHT-I]

Same God as the one the fearful, judgmental folks follow. ;)



Only the ones who voted to be tolerant actually understood Jesus' message. The others just wish they did.


You've made a fairly common liberal error. Jesus Christ was not tolerant at all. He is very strict and demanding. What the uninitiated liberal mistakes for tolerance is actually love. What liberals mistake as acceptance is actually patience. What liberals mistake as being excused is really mercy. Once you are dead that all stops and what is left is judgment. The people who walk out of the Episcopal communion are afraid and I don't blame them. It's a terrible thing to fall into the hands of the living God. Be afraid.

May their God strangle on His own excrement.


Heh heh. You do realize you've condemned yourself to an eternity in Hell for the mortal sin of blasphemy? Even if you're unaware that you blasphemed, you have. You have judged whose God is whose. You have NO authority to do this.

Welcome aboard to the Hell Train. :)

[arod]

Heh heh. You do realize you've condemned yourself to an eternity in Hell for the mortal sin of blasphemy?

Only if I'm blaspheming the real God. To my mind, it was no more blasphemy than hoping Dracula gets a stake through heart.

Even if you're unaware that you blasphemed, you have. You have judged whose God is whose. You have NO authority to do this.

Where the hell do you get that idea? I don't just have the authority, I have the responsibility to discern the falseness of anything claiming to be God. Having made said discernment, there is nothing wrong with declaring it, knowing that no one is bound by what I say.

Arod, this is how you've committed the mortal sin.

These people believe in ONE God, they believe in the SAME God you do, they believe in the SAME God as every other Christian, ergo, you have told the One True God that you hope he chokes on His own excrement.

If that isn't a mortal sin, I've never heard one.

Dress lightly.

Only if I'm blaspheming the real God. To my mind, it was no more blasphemy than hoping Dracula gets a stake through heart.Where the hell do you get that idea? I don't just have the authority, I have the responsibility to discern the falseness of anything claiming to be God. Having made said discernment, there is nothing wrong with declaring it, knowing that no one is bound by what I say.


Your eyes are brown, aren't they? They have to be because you are SO full of shit, it's oozing. You do NOT have any responsibility for anyone else. Best to take care of your own dirty laundry before you start playing with others'.

When you have achieved perfectness, then you'll understand. Right now, you are in a void. Even I can see that. You are living your life through these conceptions that you have created yourself. I suggest you get some religious counseling at the faith of your choice...because you are "warping" things so out of proportion, you're preposterous.

[arod]

they believe in the SAME God you do,

No they don't.

[arod]

Your eyes are brown, aren't they? They have to be because you are SO full of shit, it's oozing. You do NOT have any responsibility for anyone else.

Never said I did.

Best to take care of your own dirty laundry before you start playing with others'.

I'm certainly no more wrong for playing with others' "dirty laundry" than you are for playing with mine.

Never said I did.I'm certainly no more wrong for playing with others' "dirty laundry" than you are for playing with mine.


Sir, it wasn't ME who said "may their God choke on His own excrement." You ask any "real" Christian on here if that isn't the most blasphemous God damn thing they've ever heard.

Forgive me. I went back and clipped your EXACT words. You will notice that you used the capital G in "God" and the capital H in "His," thereby affirming to me, at least, that you have given this God, the same respect reserved for the One True God.


May their God strangle on His own excrement.

[arod]

Sir, it wasn't ME who said "may their God choke on His own excrement." You ask any "real" Christian on here if that isn't the most blasphemous God damn thing they've ever heard.


Hey, start a poll on it. :)

[arod]

Forgive me. I went back and clipped your EXACT words. You will notice that you used the capital G in "God" and the capital H in "His," thereby affirming to me, at least, that you have given this God, the same respect reserved for the One True God.

I was just acknowledging that they consider the entity who approves of perversion the One True God.

I was just acknowledging that they consider the entity who approves of perversion the One True God.


No one has said they "approve" of it. If every person who preaches could have their souls examined by we mortals, there wouldn't be any preaching whatsoever going on.

[Tiger]

You've made a fairly common liberal error. Jesus Christ was not tolerant at all. He is very strict and demanding. What the uninitiated liberal mistakes for tolerance is actually love. What liberals mistake as acceptance is actually patience. What liberals mistake as being excused is really mercy. Once you are dead that all stops and what is left is judgment. The people who walk out of the Episcopal communion are afraid and I don't blame them. It's a terrible thing to fall into the hands of the living God. Be afraid.



"Be afraid, huh?"

Sorry - no can oblige that bull-hockey. Fear is for the ignorant. Fear actually is borne in ignorance. But once one understands that there is nothing to fear - one becomes not afraid and becomes tolerant of others as they are of no threat to the person in question.

You mistakenly assume that the teachings of Jesus were demanding and intolerant. Nothing could be further from the truth - you are a victim of Pauline Christianity - and as such are fearful. Fine. You live your life with silly little rules and laws that you have convinced yourself are important to your salvation. Again - fine.

But there are those who have progressed passed the fearful to the realisation that love and fear cannot coexist.

If you want to believe you need to fear and obey the Bible God - by all means - do so.

[lgllady]

Well, obviously this "man" has proven to his diocese, the bishops and his Cardinal that he is a man of God or they wouldn't have ordained him to begin with.


Either that, or he has succeeded in intimidating them.

I note that those who want NOT to follow this gay bishop are already being accused of belonging to a church of "haters".

They are not haters, they simply believe differently. Which proves my point. Part of the gay agenda is to change the fundamental belief system in the Church which should not be allowed.

[Tiger]

I was just acknowledging that they consider the entity who approves of perversion the One True God.



You assume that God sees perversion as YOU do. tsk....tsk....

[Tiger]

Either that, or he has succeeded in intimidating them.

I note that those who want NOT to follow this gay bishop are already being accused of belonging to a church of "haters".

They are not haters, they simply believe differently. Which proves my point. Part of the gay agenda is to change the fundamental belief system in the Church which should not be allowed.



BS - those who condemn are haters - pure and simple.

Good riddance to them.

[I-RIGHT-I]

"Be afraid, huh?"

Sorry - no can oblige that bull-hockey. Fear is for the ignorant. Fear actually is borne in ignorance. But once one understands that there is nothing to fear - one becomes not afraid and becomes tolerant of others as they are of no threat to the person in question.

The kind of fear I'm talking about is born out of understanding and not ignorance, love and not terrified obeisance. I assume you're coming from a non deist point of view when you talk about toleration and unequivocal acceptance of another person but I'd venture to say that history has proven that atheistic philosophy to be the most intolerant and hateful, murderous and selfish every devised. I'm thinking of communism in particular and the hateful rhetoric of our own atheist so called intellectual elite. There can be absolutely no love of our fellow man without a love and fear of God to temper and reconstruct our hateful nature.

You mistakenly assume that the teachings of Jesus were demanding and intolerant. Nothing could be further from the truth - you are a victim of Pauline Christianity - and as such are fearful. Fine. You live your life with silly little rules and laws that you have convinced yourself are important to your salvation. Again - fine.

I see you've picked up on the anti-Pauline rhetoric of some of our Jewish friends to bolster your hate for the Christian religion. Too bad there is no contradiction in what Paul wrote to the other writers of the books that make up the Bible. Old or New Testament. So I guess I'll just say, "back at Ya"; believe what you want but you are wrong. It's amazing how easy it is to throw away life.

But there are those who have progressed passed the fearful to the realization that love and fear cannot coexist.

It does every day. I loved my father but I also feared him, or respected what he was capable of. Too bad your dad didn't whip your ass when you were younger.

If you want to believe you need to fear and obey the Bible God - by all means - do so.

You don't really mean that. You'd put an end to it if you could and I know you and yours are working toward that end.

[Tiger]

The kind of fear I'm talking about is born out of understanding and not ignorance, love and not terrified obeisance.

The kind of fear you are talking about does not exist. Love does NOT induce fear. What you are talking about is the method of control used throughout the millenias by those who realised that a person who was afraid of an afterlife could be coerced into complacency in this one.


I assume you're coming from a non deist point of view when you talk about toleration and unequivocal acceptance of another person but I'd venture to say that history has proven that atheistic philosophy to be the most intolerant and hateful, murderous and selfish every devised.


You assume wrong. Anti-theist - not anti-deist.

I'm thinking of communism in particular and the hateful rhetoric of our own atheist so called intellectual elite. There can be absolutely no love of our fellow man without a love and fear of God to temper and reconstruct our hateful nature.

There is no logical basis for that statement. Instead = there can be NO love as long as there is fear of anything - including one's God.
.

I see you've picked up on the anti-Pauline rhetoric of some of our Jewish friends to bolster your hate for the Christian religion. Too bad there is no contradiction in what Paul wrote to the other writers of the books that make up the Bible. Old or New Testament. So I guess I'll just say, "back at Ya"; believe what you want but you are wrong. It's amazing how easy it is to throw away life.



"My Jewish friends"??? That comment will have half of NOPC rolling in the aisles. Your psychic abilities are waning, my friend.



It does every day. I loved my father but I also feared him, or respected what he was capable of. Too bad your dad didn't whip your ass when you were younger.

Well, you finally got one thing right - my dad NEVER laid a hand on me - and I respect and love him more than just about any other person on this earth. My mother did, however, and although I still love her - there is no respecting violence. I have to wonder just how much more tolerant and understanding you would have been had your father just been more of a decent guy.


You don't really mean that. You'd put an end to it if you could and I know you and yours are working toward that end.


You know "me and mine" - but you have no idea who me and mine are. I am happy to let you wallow in your pit of despair - because I know I am above it. Yes - I would likely end it if I could - but until you learn to see - you will be stuck there.

[truelies]

He is NOT demanding that everyone think as he does - only that they suspend judgement - something the Bible also asks.

But I. like you, also hope that the ones who do not accept him leave the church - it would make for a much better church and the fools that leave can form their own hateful church - or join one of the ones already operating. There are a goodly number of them.

But these are the same fools who threatened to leave in the 70s when they voted to ordain women. Losers all. Fools all. I spit on them.


Being ornery or even a bit of a pain in the neck today aren't we?

[Lazarus]

It is an abomination that gays are demanding that others change their beliefs to suit their cause. This erzatz bishop is not a sinner who is not sinning. He is currently living in a homosexual relationship with another man. He left his wife and children to live with this man.

While his actions are personal and do not affect anyone else, his demand that everyone else in the church believe the same way he does is plain flat out evil. I hope that all those who disagree leave this church to its future as a homosexual church and form their own.



I believe the "Bishop" is a closet Satanist. :o

[Tiger]

I believe the "Bishop" is a closet Satanist. :o



And I believe you were only half-raised from the dead. I think you still have one foot in the grave and that causes you to speak out of your ass.

[Lazarus]

And I believe you were only half-raised from the dead. I think you still have one foot in the grave and that causes you to speak out of your ass.


Well, you are entitled to you opinion in defense of seeming closet Satanists everywhere. ::)

[Tiger]

Well, you are entitled to you opinion in defense of seeming closet Satanists everywhere. ::)



How can I defend something that does NOT exist? Satan lives only in your dreams LAZ. But the closest thing I have ever known to that myth was a born-again Christian.

[Lazarus]

How can I defend something that does NOT exist?


You are making an admirable try...


Satan lives only in your dreams LAZ.


Satan lives at the bottom of a lake of fire. ;D And where did I say that Satanists worshipped a still potent being?


But the closest thing I have ever known to that myth was a born-again Christian.


Indeed? Well then perhaps you might appreciate this quote...


As a 12 year old in a poor, rural congregation of the Disciples of Christ, I accepted Jesus Christ as my personal Lord and Savior.


MORE (http://www.nhepiscopal.org/BishopSearch/The_Rev_Canon_V_Gene_Robinson.htm)

Yes, these seeming Satanists within the Christian Church are a far bigger problem than many dared imagine. :o ::)

[the bib]

It is an abomination that gays are demanding that others change their beliefs to suit their cause. This erzatz bishop is not a sinner who is not sinning. He is currently living in a homosexual relationship with another man. He left his wife and children to live with this man.

While his actions are personal and do not affect anyone else, his demand that everyone else in the church believe the same way he does is plain flat out evil. I hope that all those who disagree leave this church to its future as a homosexual church and form their own.



There you have it.

One can nit set up an organization who claiming "moral authority" and then set up as its titular head to lead the flock someone who can't personally follow the dictums.

It is the ultimate "bend over backwards & kiss your own ass" game of PC Twister ... a game which refuses to declare that there IS a difference between right & wrong ... moral and immoral ...

To claim authority of the moral director and then refuse to morally direct ...

it is worse than just an oxymoron,

as the boy with the finger in the dike .... (no pun intended ;) ), it opens the floodgates ... the last tie to social constructs .....

and allows anarchy within our cultural and social fabric.

When the church refuses to declare that some things are just INTOLERABLE ... well, THAT'S intolerable, too.

[the bib]

Well, obviously this "man" has proven to his diocese, the bishops and his Cardinal that he is a man of God or they wouldn't have ordained him to begin with.


True 'nuf.

HOWEVER ...

..it says more about the churh lowering the standards to the new god of moral relativism,

than the church being the church.

30 years ago this would never have been in question ...

but then 30 years ago

pc did not reign.

[the bib]

He is NOT demanding that everyone think as he does - only that
they suspend judgement - something the Bible also asks.

But I. like you, also hope that the ones who do not accept him leave the church - it would make for a much better church and the fools that leave can form their own hateful church - or join one of the ones already operating. There are a goodly number of them.

But these are the same fools who threatened to leave in the 70s when they voted to ordain women. Losers all. Fools all. I spit on them.


Tiger my friend ...

you make the mistake of bringing your own root POV into the judgement.

What you fail to realize is that the construct that demands the rejection of such a bishop is inherent within th beliefs, and therefore,'
it can not be the church AND consider tha which you find a no brainer.
By definition the core beliefs preclude such cnsiderations .... change the core belief and you can no longer claim to be, that which they claim to be.

Simply put, they can no longer BE the Episcopal church.

[the bib]

Same God as the one the fearful, judgemental folks follow. ;)



Only the ones who voted to be tolerant actually understood Jesus' message. The others just wish they did.


Not Jesus' messgae my dear ... Tiger's message. :-* :-*

[Tiger]

Tiger my friend ...

you make the mistake of bringing your own root POV into the judgement.

What you fail to realize is that the construct that demands the rejection of such a bishop is inherent within th beliefs, and therefore,'
it can not be the church AND consider tha which you find a no brainer.
By definition the core beliefs preclude such cnsiderations .... change the core belief and you can no longer claim to be, that which they claim to be.

Simply put, they can no longer BE the Episcopal church.




Actually you are dead wrong. The bishop was voted in by a majority - that in essence proves that the stance the church is taking is one that they feel is well within the construct of the faith.

They are making a value call - hate or love. Love won.

Better luck next time. ;)

[Tiger]

Not Jesus' messgae my dear ... Tiger's message. :-* :-*



Gee - for once Jesus and I are on the same page! ;D

[the bib]

Actually you are dead wrong. The bishop was voted in by a majority - that in essence proves that the stance the church is taking is one that they feel is well within the construct of the faith.

They are making a value call - hate or love. Love won.

Better luck next time. ;)


You mix your metaphors Tiger.

Worse yet you refuse to see acknowledge the fundamental issue.

Love has nothing at all to do w/it, nor does choosing love.

The Christian belief as TAUGHT by Christ is "Hate the sin, love the sinner.

NO ONE is saying that this man should be rejected from belonging to the church.

The issue is whether he is qualified to LEAD the church.

As titular head it is necessary to teach Scripture, teach God's laws.

To have a practicing homosexual in such a position demands that the Scriptures be ignoired in favor of the religious SANCTIONING of the practice ...

thereby CHANGING the historical/scriptural LAW.....

at which point by definition the church no longrer exists ...

OR

the law and beliefs remain the same and the homosexual leader must say: "Do as I say and not as I do."

But LOVE as you insist was the driving force has as much to do with the underlying issue AND CORE BELIEFS than the price of tomatoes in China has to do with the weather in the USA.

IOW, the issue is apples and you, my friend are arguing oranges. ;)

You say the vote was majority .... but not majority of the membership ... just their representatives ... a microcosm if you will of our citizenry with our own deadbeat representatives.

Methinks the EC is repeating the mistakes of the RCC by lowering standards and qualifications ..... while they guard the front door, they lleave their back doors (literall & figuratively ;D ) wide open.

The fundamental issue which you discount is the core belief of the Christian churches is that physical love is between opposite sexes ... God's plan to ensure the procreation of mankind.

No one says that two gays can;t love each other as much as two heteros .... BUT they CAN NEVER procreate ... that is a fact.

In the beginning God made man & woman.

God created Adam and Eve....... NOT Adam & Steve.

[Tiger]

You mix your metaphors Tiger.

Worse yet you refuse to see acknowledge the fundamental issue.

I may have mixed metaphors - but that last sentence of your's is not even a sentence. ;)

Love has nothing at all to do w/it, nor does choosing love.

The Christian belief as TAUGHT by Christ is "Hate the sin, love the sinner.


Oh, hockey-puck. Please show me the verse where Jesus utters those words.

NO ONE is saying that this man should be rejected from belonging to the church.

The issue is whether he is qualified to LEAD the church.

I can see no reason why he is not as qualified as anyone else.

As titular head it is necessary to teach Scripture, teach God's laws.

And that is where you make your biggest mistake. In assuming that it is okay to set aside some of the scriptures and only pick and choose which ones you like the best. You are seeming to forget that witches should not be suffered to live - etc. And folks like you complained when they stopped burning heretics. But the Church has over the centuries ruled out MUCH of what is ludicrous in the Bible. This is just one more thing.

To have a practicing homosexual in such a position demands that the Scriptures be ignoired in favor of the religious SANCTIONING of the practice ...

thereby CHANGING the historical/scriptural LAW.....

at which point by definition the church no longrer exists ...

OR

the law and beliefs remain the same and the homosexual leader must say: "Do as I say and not as I do."

Nope - he does not have to say anything at all about homosexuality. Nor does he need to tell them to stone children who disobey or burn any heretics they come across. FAce it - the Bible is chock-full of SHIT!!! Even the Church leaders know it. And the members are becoming civilised enough that they want a church of love - not a church of SHIT. Why do you think so very very many of the old laws have been discarded? Becasue they have been recognized for the trash they are.

But LOVE as you insist was the driving force has as much to do with the underlying issue AND CORE BELIEFS than the price of tomatoes in China has to do with the weather in the USA.

IOW, the issue is apples and you, my friend are arguing oranges. ;)

You say the vote was majority .... but not majority of the membership ... just their representatives ... a microcosm if you will of our citizenry with our own deadbeat representatives.

Actually - I read that only a small minority were making waves. If more disagreed in any fashion more than just lipping off - the number would be higher. But you are wrong - it all does have to do with love. Jesus told them NOT to judge. He showed his acceptance of both the prostitute and the thieves. And that - in the face of those expousing the LAW.

Methinks the EC is repeating the mistakes of the RCC by lowering standards and qualifications ..... while they guard the front door, they lleave their back doors (literall & figuratively ;D ) wide open.

The fundamental issue which you discount is the core belief of the Christian churches is that physical love is between opposite sexes ... God's plan to ensure the procreation of mankind.

No one says that two gays can;t love each other as much as two heteros .... BUT they CAN NEVER procreate ... that is a fact.

In the beginning God made man & woman.

God created Adam and Eve....... NOT Adam & Steve.


So what? Opposite sex unions are for creating kids. Everyone knows that. That is not going to change.

But that has NOTHING to do with one's love for another person.

And even IF one does NOT approve of the act - they have NO RIGHT to judge them. At least according to Jesus.

But hey - I have said all along that the Church did not follow the teachings of Jesus. Maybe now they are finally coming into compliance. ;)

[the bib]

bib Worse yet you refuse to see acknowledge the fundamental issue.

I'm a better thinker than typist ... especially on this walk around computer we brought on vacation.

s/b "see or acknowledge"

tiger Oh, hockey-puck. Please show me the verse where Jesus utters those words.



Don;t hafta' darlin'! Remember, I'm Catholic ... tradition holds that knowldge is not sola scriptura but from Tradition ... and tradition .. that is tolerance and peace (words Christ never uttered either) says "love the sinner, hate the sin."

tiger I can see no reason why he is not as qualified as anyone else.

Quote: bib
As titular head it is necessary to teach Scripture, teach God's laws.

tiger
And that is where you make your biggest mistake. In assuming that it is okay to set aside some of the scriptures and only pick and choose which ones you like the best. You are seeming to forget that witches should not be suffered to live - etc. And folks like you complained when they stopped burning heretics. But the Church has over the centuries ruled out MUCH of what is ludicrous in the Bible. This is just one more thing.

Mixing metaphors agin?

Burning witches/heretics is not a current day remedy ... an in any event, ther is no comparison to this issue.

It ws Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve ...

I AM NOT sayng that homosexuals are unwprthy of love, tolerance and social acceptance .... I am saying that practicing homosexuals are not qualified to preach the Bible ... they same Scripture that found it importqnt enough to sanctify the union of males and females but not important enought to sanction homosexuality.

gotta go now ... late for dinner, back atcha later.

[I-RIGHT-I]

FAce it - the Bible is chock-full of SHIT!!! Even the Church leaders know it. And the members are becoming civilised enough that they want a church of love - not a church of SHIT.

The Parable of the Ants, or, the skeptic's dare


Two ants were crossing the desert when they came across two giant ribbons of steel spanning the countryside. Said one to the other, “What is this?” His friend replied, “This is a railroad track, and upon it runs a huge machine called a train. The train is dispatched by an operator in a distant city, who regulates its activity.” “Incredible!,” protested the little unbelieving ant, as he crawled upon one of the rails. “If there is such an operator, I challenge him to send a train down here right now and run me over!”



You're a lot ike a bug waiting on a windshield Tiger.

The Parable of the Ants, or, the skeptic's dare


Two ants were crossing the desert when they came across two giant ribbons of steel spanning the countryside. Said one to the other, “What is this?” His friend replied, “This is a railroad track, and upon it runs a huge machine called a train. The train is dispatched by an operator in a distant city, who regulates its activity.” “Incredible!,” protested the little unbelieving ant, as he crawled upon one of the rails. “If there is such an operator, I challenge him to send a train down here right now and run me over!”



You're a lot ike a bug waiting on a windshield Tiger.


I would pretty much imagine God gives about as much a shit about us as that train does about the ant.

IRI, let me ask you something, please....

What has God ever done for you that you couldn't have done for yourself?

[wendy]

The Parable of the Ants, or, the skeptic's dare


Two ants were crossing the desert when they came across two giant ribbons of steel spanning the countryside. Said one to the other, “What is this?” His friend replied, “This is a railroad track, and upon it runs a huge machine called a train. The train is dispatched by an operator in a distant city, who regulates its activity.” “Incredible!,” protested the little unbelieving ant, as he crawled upon one of the rails. “If there is such an operator, I challenge him to send a train down here right now and run me over!”



You're a lot ike a bug waiting on a windshield Tiger.


Silly parable. You're assuming the ant isn't going to hear the train coming...or feel the vibration on the rail. Oh wait...I get it...it's an invisible train that runs just above the rails, right? ::)

I hope you come up with a better story next time.

[I-RIGHT-I]

Silly parable. You're assuming the ant isn't going to hear the train coming...or feel the vibration on the rail. Oh wait...I get it...it's an invisible train that runs just above the rails, right? ::)

I hope you come up with a better story next time.


It's not silly at all. Last week a guy in Kansas City broke down on the side if I-35. He couldn't get his car going again and so walked away from the highway to make a phone call on his cell. The witness said the man had his cell to one ear and his hand over the other so he could hear. He didn't hear the train.

The world if full of people that don't hear the train.

It's not silly at all. Last week a guy in Kansas City broke down on the side if I-35. He couldn't get his car going again and so walked away from the highway to make a phone call on his cell. The witness said the man had his cell to one ear and his hand over the other so he could hear. He didn't hear the train.

The world if full of people that don't hear the train.




The world is full of idiots on cell phones.

[I-RIGHT-I]

I hope you come up with a better story next time.


Get Your Own Dirt


God was once approached by a scientist who said, "Listen God, we've decided we don't need you anymore. These days we can clone people, transplant organs and do all sorts of things that used to be considered miraculous."

God replied, "Don't need me huh? How about we put your theory to the test. Why don't we have a competition to see who can make a human being, say, a male human being."

The scientist agrees, so God declares they should do it like he did in the good old days when he created Adam.

"Fine" says the scientist as he bends down to scoop up a handful of dirt."

"Whoa!" says God, shaking his head in disapproval. "Not so fast. You get your own dirt."

[wendy]

::)

[CaptainKirk]

IRI, let me ask you something, please....

What has God ever done for you that you couldn't have done for yourself?

consider this...maybe he couldnt bend willy 270 degrees for a reach around....and as if by magic an adult toy store opened across the street........and took scrip on even exchange

[I-RIGHT-I]

::)
:P

[I-RIGHT-I]

consider this...maybe he couldnt bend willy 270 degrees for a reach around....and as if by magic an adult toy store opened across the street........and took scrip on even exchange


Live long and fester Cap

[CaptainKirk]

Live long and fester Cap

I would rejoinder with something suggestive, yet anotomically impossible, but the spirit works in mysterious ways......

doesnt she

[I-RIGHT-I]

IRI, let me ask you something, please....

What has God ever done for you that you couldn't have done for yourself?


I've been wondering how best to answer this without spilling too much personal information or seeming too sappy.

I wouldn't know how to live for anyone but myself. I wouldn't know how to die any other way than alone. I wouldn't know the difference between what is right and what is right now. I wouldn't know the reason I am and I wouldn't have cared. What God has done is to make me understand that I am eternally intended and welcomed into a rich and ultimately fulfilling reality, meant to flourish forever. Knowing this I no longer worry about the small stuff. God has also opened up the Bible to me. It is no longer written in a foreign language. Front to back it all makes sense as a complete whole. In addition, there's things I've done in my life that I can't forgive myself for. He's done that for me.

[CaptainKirk]

In addition, there's things I've done in my life that I can't forgive myself for.



And like many/most Christians youll probably do em all over again, perhaps not serially, or with the same degree of panache', but conceptually similar....and without battin an eye



He's done that for me.


and will again...see to quote the Allman Brothers...The Road Goes on Forever....and although you posses the element of free choice......

youll always have that fallback position...intent be damned...

No wonder the Thirty Years War lasted just that long.......too much mimickry and candle waving to masquerade as legitimate butchery

[Larry_Oldtimer]

A pastor of a church was out for a walk on Sunday afternoon after having held church services. He came across a man working in a well-tended garden. He spoke to the man and said, "What a beatiful garden the Lord has given you. You and the Lord have made this into a wonderful place." The man responded, "Yeah, but you should have seen it when the Lord had it all to Himself."

I guess that is why God put Adam in the Garden of Eden to tend the garden. When God has it all to Himself it is nothing but a mess.

[NorNec]

A pastor of a church was out for a walk on Sunday afternoon after having held church services. He came across a man working in a well-tended garden. He spoke to the man and said, "What a beatiful garden the Lord has given you. You and the Lord have made this into a wonderful place." The man responded, "Yeah, but you should have seen it when the Lord had it all to Himself."

I guess that is why God put Adam in the Garden of Eden to tend the garden. When God has it all to Himself it is nothing but a mess.



It is funny how each person interprets that one. I looked at it before your commentary and thought.....before sin and having to toil....it must have been really something. I think you are bitter about not being able to tend your own "bush" if you know what I mean. :(

[NorNec]

I've been wondering how best to answer this without spilling too much personal information or seeming too sappy.

I wouldn't know how to live for anyone but myself. I wouldn't know how to die any other way than alone. I wouldn't know the difference between what is right and what is right now. I wouldn't know the reason I am and I wouldn't have cared. What God has done is to make me understand that I am eternally intended and welcomed into a rich and ultimately fulfilling reality, meant to flourish forever. Knowing this I no longer worry about the small stuff. God has also opened up the Bible to me. It is no longer written in a foreign language. Front to back it all makes sense as a complete whole. In addition, there's things I've done in my life that I can't forgive myself for. He's done that for me.







Great response IRI. great :)

[I-RIGHT-I]

And like many/most Christians youll probably do em all over again, perhaps not serially, or with the same degree of panache', but conceptually similar....and without battin an eye



and will again...see to quote the Allman Brothers...The Road Goes on Forever....and although you posses the element of free choice......

youll always have that fallback position...intent be damned...

No wonder the Thirty Years War lasted just that long.......too much mimickry and candle waving to masquerade as legitimate butchery

The old bromide, "It takes one to know one" is not only true but exceptionally insightful. As you have correctly though too simply identified just one of the contradictions in all practicing Christians one might assume you know of what you speak. Of course you're a human being and all mortals are not only capable but compelled to act in ways that are contrary to their conscience but in complete accordance with their nature. What you've failed to address and where your criticism falls short is the fact that the Christian faith does not promise or teach that once you have self identified as a follower of Christ that human nature is transformed so, Christians still fall. The difference is a Christian will get back up again.

You've also indicated that "without blinking an eye", in other words without any thought or pang of conscience a Christian will again fall in the same hole; this is where the bromide comes in. You have assumed that a Christian is thinking and feeling the same way you do. This is an error and a lie unless you have the ability to look into a man's heart and mind and to know it. What this in fact does is tell us more about you than about me. In any case my sins were not as mudane as you suggest and so you have underestimated my desperate need for forgiveness. Perhaps you've underestimated your own as well. Trust me when I say that when you are shown your true self there are some things you simply can never do again.

There's not anything wrong with the Alman Brothers, but....

Oh Well

I can't help about the shape I'm in
I can't sing, I ain't pretty and my legs are thin
But don't ask me what I think of you
I might not give the answer that you want me to

Oh well

Now, when I talked to God I knew he'd understand
He said, "Stick by my side and I'll be your guiding hand
But don't ask me what I think of you
I might not give the answer that you want me to"

Oh well

Peter Green

Have a great day

[arod]

Actually you are dead wrong. The bishop was voted in by a majority - that in essence proves that the stance the church is taking is one that they feel is well within the construct of the faith.

They are making a value call - hate or love. Love won.

Better luck next time. ;)

Those sheeple don't know what love is.

[CaptainKirk]

What this in fact does is tell us more about you than about me. In any case my sins were not as mudane as you suggest and so you have underestimated my desperate need for forgiveness. Perhaps you've underestimated your own as well


What does it tell you about me? FYI people who fucked me over in corporate life had one common denominator...they were all holy roller Christians and let anyone whod listen know it.....the helping hand that concels the knife...try that parable on for size

I sleep well knowing I didnt waste any of these men, though each had track records of fucking over others as well.....

so much for their Christianity bullshit



Trust me when I say that when you are shown your true self there are some things you simply can never do again.


Other than adultery, which Id probably repeat if dealt the same cards as occured during my first marraige..and divorcing my ex....I suspect my sins have been minor......and I havent repeated either as no grounds exist.....

but Ill be damned if a real sinner excoriates me for minor violations out of guilt then gets forgiven by a gd priest in confession-a priest who may or may not have had his twinkie up some boys behind under threat of excommunication-only to have that or other more creative sins occur down the road...

spare me..Ive heard the drill eons ago.........

[Lazarus]

Unless the trash is taken out, it piles up and stinks up the whole place until life becomes intolerable. If it is your lifestyle to fester among the dung heaps of the world, then you probably will not notice that you, yourself, stink to high heaven--but on a cautionary note to those who have abandoned the dung heap for cleaner pastures--you don't smell all that much better--nor do I--than those who still call the dungpile "home"--so let's drop the pretenses and the silly arguments and see what we can do to make this world a little better place for the greater number of us. And if the trash is not only piled high within the Church but also running the Church, then either take out the trash or abandon the dungpile.

It is the will of the Father that those members of the body of Christ who do not bear fruit be cut off from the body of Christ, then to whither, die, then be gathered for the fire. John 15:1-6. :o

[mbig]

Catholic priests are dying of AIDS, often in silence

By JUDY L. THOMAS - The Kansas City Star
Date: 01/29/00 22:15

Hundreds of Roman Catholic priests across the United States have died of AIDS-related illnesses, and hundreds more are living with HIV, the virus that causes the disease.

The actual number of AIDS deaths is difficult to determine. But it appears priests are dying of AIDS at a rate at least Four times that of the general U.S. population, according to estimates from medical experts and priests and an analysis of health statistics by The Kansas City Star.

In Missouri and Kansas alone, at least 16 priests and two religious-order brothers have died of AIDS since early 1987.

The deaths are of such concern to the church that most dioceses and religious orders now require applicants for the priesthood to take an HIV-antibody test before their ordination.

For the nation's 60 million Catholics, served by 46,000 priests, the AIDS issue goes straight to the heart of church doctrine -- a doctrine that teaches compassion and forgiveness but also considers homosexual relations a sin and opposes the modern practice of "safe sex."

In a nationwide confidential survey of 3,000 priests by The Star, two-thirds of the more than 800 responding lauded the church for being caring and compassionate to priests with AIDS. Often, the church covers medical costs, gives them a place to live and cares for them until they die.

Most priests, however, said the church failed to offer an early and effective sexual education that might have prevented infection in the first place. Two-thirds said sexuality either was not addressed at all or was not discussed adequately in the seminary. Three of four said the church needed to offer more education about sexual issues.

"Sexuality still needs to be talked about and dealt with," said the Rev. Dennis Rausch, a priest with AIDS who runs an AIDS ministry program for Catholic Charities in the Archdiocese of Miami.

"I've been trying to get into the seminary here for the last several years to do an awareness course for the guys, so when they come out, they at least have some knowledge."

Many priests and behavioral experts argue that the church's adherence to 12th-century doctrine about the virtues of celibacy and its teachings on homosexuality have contributed to the spread of AIDS within the clergy. Unwittingly, the church has kept fledgling priests -- some of whom were as young as 14 when they entered seminary in the '60s and '70s -- uneducated about the reality of a sexual world and its temptations.

[...]

"How to be celibate and to be gay at the same time, and how to be celibate and heterosexual at the same time, that's what we were never really taught how to do. And that was a major failing." (!!! mbig)

[......]

Hiding the truth

Exactly how many priests have died of AIDS or are infected with HIV is unknown, in part because many suffer in solitude.

When priests do tell their superiors, the cases generally are handled quietly, either at the priests' requests or because church officials are reluctant to discuss them.

In 1995, Bishop Emerson J. Moore left the Archdiocese of New York and went to Minnesota, where he died in a hospice of an AIDS-related illness. His death certificate attributed his death to "unknown natural causes" and listed his occupation as "laborer" in the manufacturing industry.

After a Minnesota AIDS activist filed a complaint, officials changed the cause of death to "HIV-related illness." The occupation, however, has not been corrected....""

http://www.kcstar.com/projects/priests/priest.htm

[I-RIGHT-I]

Catholic priests are dying of AIDS, often in silence

By JUDY L. THOMAS - The Kansas City Star
Date: 01/29/00 22:15

Hundreds of Roman Catholic priests across the United States have died of AIDS-related illnesses, and hundreds more are living with HIV, the virus that causes the disease.

The actual number of AIDS deaths is difficult to determine. But it appears priests are dying of AIDS at a rate at least Four times that of the general U.S. population, according to estimates from medical experts and priests and an analysis of health statistics by The Kansas City Star.

In Missouri and Kansas alone, at least 16 priests and two religious-order brothers have died of AIDS since early 1987.

Compared to the hairdressing and interior design professions I'm sure the numbers are small.

The deaths are of such concern to the church that most dioceses and religious orders now require applicants for the priesthood to take an HIV-antibody test before their ordination.

Why don't you just ask them if they like boys?

For the nation's 60 million Catholics, served by 46,000 priests, the AIDS issue goes straight to the heart of church doctrine -- a doctrine that teaches compassion and forgiveness but also considers homosexual relations a sin and opposes the modern practice of "safe sex."

Compassion and forgiveness without discipline is meaningless. The Church has intentionally looked the other way when ordaining known sexual deviants. In fact it's reported that some seminaries are heterosexual "unfriendly". The Roman Church like many Protestant Churches have abandoned strict Biblical doctrine. The difference between them is the Catholics are sneaky about it.

In a nationwide confidential survey of 3,000 priests by The Star, two-thirds of the more than 800 responding lauded the church for being caring and compassionate to priests with AIDS. Often, the church covers medical costs, gives them a place to live and cares for them until they die.

Most priests, however, said the church failed to offer an early and effective sexual education that might have prevented infection in the first place. Two-thirds said sexuality either was not addressed at all or was not discussed adequately in the seminary. Three of four said the church needed to offer more education about sexual issues.

Translation: Two thirds or more of the priests surveyed are homosexuals who of course want to be "tolerant" of each other. Three quarters of them are sexually active in one way or another and blame the church for not properly explaining what the word celibacy means. They are acting as if this little feature of Catholicism is written someplace down in the fine print.

"Sexuality still needs to be talked about and dealt with," said the Rev. Dennis Rausch, a priest with AIDS who runs an AIDS ministry program for Catholic Charities in the Archdiocese of Miami.

"I've been trying to get into the seminary here for the last several years to do an awareness course for the guys, so when they come out, they at least have some knowledge."

Ah, brother Dennis, the guys who aren't queer don't need you and the guys who are already know. What you need to do is convince them that homosexuality is WRONG and especially WRONG for men who enter the priesthood. Then tell them if they get AIDS they are excommunicated and the church isn't going to pick up the tab for the 100K a year or more it's going to keep them alive to infect little boys.

Many priests and behavioral experts argue that the church's adherence to 12th-century doctrine about the virtues of celibacy and its teachings on homosexuality have contributed to the spread of AIDS within the clergy. Unwittingly, the church has kept fledgling priests -- some of whom were as young as 14 when they entered seminary in the '60s and '70s -- uneducated about the reality of a sexual world and its temptations.

I'd really like to read a paper defending that rationale. Sounds to me what they are saying is "if you tell somebody something is WRONG they want to do it all the more". But I had no idea that fourteen year old boys are locked up in seminaries with these perverts. Talk about "to your door service" for the pedophiles. That's almost too good to be true.

[...]

"How to be celibate and to be gay at the same time, and how to be celibate and heterosexual at the same time, that's what we were never really taught how to do. And that was a major failing." (!!! mbig)

This idiocy of this in light of 2000 years of church teaching is astounding. One of these days the poor sheep of the Roman Catholic Church are going to wake up and understand that leaving the "Church" isn't the same as leaving the faith. In fact, it will become clear that the only way to save themselves and their faith is to walk out the door, shake the dust from their feet and never look back.