Customer Discussions > Christianity forum

Part III: Call for Reform in the Catholic Church--Why and what is needed to effect much needed change!

This discussion has reached the maximum length permitted, and cannot accept new replies. Start a new discussion


Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 6976-7000 of 1000 posts in this discussion
In reply to an earlier post on Aug 3, 2012 3:47:45 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Aug 3, 2012 4:23:13 PM PDT
Patricia, I'm guessing that 2008 was the year you lost your husband, and again I offer you my sincere sympathies for your loss. Based on what you've posted here, it sounds like he was a wonderful husband and father.

In reply to an earlier post on Aug 3, 2012 4:01:38 PM PDT
Raulito says:
Patricia,

"I have no problem with same-sex marraige-civil unions..."

the key issue is whether God has a problem with it. Our ways are not his ways.

In reply to an earlier post on Aug 3, 2012 4:15:02 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Aug 3, 2012 4:20:26 PM PDT
Raulito, Patricia has the good grace to see that there is a big difference between trying to enforce "God's ways" with people who believe in His way, only, and trying to force even non-believers into having to live according to their beliefs in God. That's also why we have separation of church or state. Or if you want Church in charge of state, you can always apply for a job at the Vatican.

In reply to an earlier post on Aug 3, 2012 4:32:46 PM PDT
K. Cooper says:
alex

Good point in pointing out that dealing with the US govt. is no picnic.

In reply to an earlier post on Aug 3, 2012 4:38:07 PM PDT
K. Cooper says:
Alex

is it oaky then if gay judges force their opinions on the public notreligious institutions?
I don't have a problem if a state votes one way or the other and it becomes law in that state what they vote. I don't like judges overstepping their bounds and telling the rest of us what we must do.

In reply to an earlier post on Aug 3, 2012 4:43:28 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Aug 3, 2012 5:14:36 PM PDT
In addition to being a veteran I also worked for the Department of Energy for three years, at a nuclear waste disposal site in southeastern Washington State. I used to 'affectionately' refer to the place--much to the horror of several of my fellow employees--as "Auschwitz west." Though I can still tell you (if you're interested) the amusing, true-life story of how uranium was transported, by land, almost non-stop, from eastern Washington, to the Los Alamos Weapons Testing Site, in New Mexico, several months before atomic bombs were dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Japan.

In reply to an earlier post on Aug 3, 2012 4:55:33 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Aug 3, 2012 5:06:53 PM PDT
The judge's sexual orientation was already ruled "irrelevant," when the first attempt was made to overturn his ruling. And to the very best of my awareness, the judge who made that ruling, is not gay. Not that it should matter.

So, why don't we just wait and see what the U.S. Supreme Court has to say about this, ok?

Until then, I would like for you to think about this. You do realize, don't you, that you have, in fact, been letting a goodly number of (mostly closeted) gay priests tell you and others, what you "must do," for dozens of centuries, now?

Posted on Aug 3, 2012 5:06:21 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Aug 3, 2012 5:09:38 PM PDT
DMP, I could use a little help here! Don't you have some long list squirreled away of all the great Catholic clerics of yore who are known to have been gay? And if you want to include saintly lesbian sisters as well, please, feel free to add them to the list.

I only know of the lesbian nun who hit on me during a SNAP picketing. It wasn't the first time that a lesbian has completely misread me and my 'vibe'. But I was more than a little shocked that she would come on to anyone in the course of an event that was about protesting clergy sexual abuse! There she was being a blatant part of the problem, while advocating against it.

And people wonder why I think of some--though certainly not all--Catholics as being more than a little bit off-kilter?

In reply to an earlier post on Aug 3, 2012 5:12:41 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Aug 3, 2012 5:15:23 PM PDT
Raulito says:
Alexandra,

"I only know of a lesbian nun who hit on me during the SNAP pickering"

You should have said to the nun "you have great taste sister.." LOL.

In reply to an earlier post on Aug 3, 2012 5:16:10 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Aug 3, 2012 5:28:22 PM PDT
No, actually, this was a nun who volunteered to picket with us, and was recommended by her VOTF (Voice of the Faithful) friends, a husband and wife, who also joined us in the picket.

Oh, forgot to add. A local SNAP leader also once found herself having to ask the newest member of her group to leave and never return, again, after she was tipped off to the fact he was a convicted pedophile priest. Priests and nuns posing as bogus victims were nothing new for us, but the perp priest was a scary new development.

In reply to an earlier post on Aug 3, 2012 5:28:30 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Aug 3, 2012 5:34:14 PM PDT
DMP says:
Alexandra ~

The list of gay Popes (excluding the ones who were busily bisexual) includes:

John XII (r. 955-964)
Benedict IX (r. 1033-1045; 1047-1048)
John XXII (r. 1316-34)
Paul II (r. 1464-1471)
Sixtus IV (r. 1471-1484)
Alexander VI (r. 1492-1503)
Julius II (r. 1503-1513)
Leo X (r. 1513-1521)
Julius III (r. 1550-1555)

EDIT: Those are the ones we are sure of--rumors abound around about a dozen others.

In reply to an earlier post on Aug 3, 2012 5:35:24 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Aug 3, 2012 5:56:15 PM PDT
Bless you my son! Deae nomen eorum et impia filiae et sanctorum fumus. Amen.

The Irreverent Mother Alex

In reply to an earlier post on Aug 3, 2012 5:39:56 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Aug 3, 2012 5:41:47 PM PDT
Raulito says:
Alexandra,

The list from DMP coincides with the most corrupt Popes in history. I'm not surprised.

In reply to an earlier post on Aug 3, 2012 5:48:29 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Aug 3, 2012 5:49:36 PM PDT
Gayness and corruption are no more synonymous than being liberal means you're automatically an atheist. Grow up, already, Raulito!

Having said that, if you really think gayness and corruption are in some way synonymous, then you should be at the forefront in advocating against an all celibate, or all-male priesthood.

Think before you respond, please.

In reply to an earlier post on Aug 3, 2012 6:01:14 PM PDT
I think you also have to take into consideration, Patricia, the fact that even when hetero couples are denied the ability to marry within any church, they can still be wed in a civil ceremony.

Posted on Aug 3, 2012 6:20:16 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Aug 3, 2012 6:51:32 PM PDT
Raulito, if memory serves, in times not so distantly past, the citing of any Medieval, Inquisitional or Renaissance-era Pope's corrupted inclinations would have resulted in you and other defenders of the faith posting vociferous disclaimers in defense of these same popes.

So, now that you believe these same popes to have been gay, it's "different?" And you no longer want to defend them against all those Catholic-bashing Protestants who rewrote Catholic history, to suit themselves. Why's that?

In reply to an earlier post on Aug 3, 2012 6:27:40 PM PDT
And so can, or will, homosexual couples.

I had an aunt who was gay. She lived longer with her lover than most heterosexual couples are married. She did not think that being married was necessary. All of the concerns that modern homosexual couples seem to have that are their impetus to fight for the right to marry they had through legal actions. And when the hospital tried to deny her lover the right to be with her on her death bed, her brother, my uncle said to them, pointing to the lover, "she will be here whenever she wants." And she was.

That was the 80s. Today is different. I can hear her say, "You can have what you want if you are willing to do your homework." And I know she would have advised the gay rights advocates--what she always advised us--"Take it to the top. Don't hurt the little guy. Make him your friend."

In reply to an earlier post on Aug 3, 2012 6:32:24 PM PDT
Hmm. You were really solicited by a nun? One of those good and holy, can-do-no-wrong nuns? Really. My, my what will we do.

;-)

Posted on Aug 3, 2012 6:35:03 PM PDT
Virtue and sexuality are two distinctly different attributes. The biggest difference is the second is like fire: you can use it for good purposes and you can use it for bad purposes. But abstinence from sex, of itself, is no more synonymous with ability to live a virtuous life, than having a high IQ means a person also has emotional intelligence or common sense.

In reply to an earlier post on Aug 3, 2012 6:37:29 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Aug 4, 2012 7:34:03 AM PDT
I just told her thanks, but no thanks. It wasn't like she tried to rape me, and in the end I think she ended up feeling more embarrassed than I did. It was really a case of her having simply misread me.

Feel the need to add this. One of the members of my former online support group for women abused by priests was also a nun, and lesbian--whose identity and whereabouts will remain forever anonymous for purposes of this discussion. She joined our group because she'd been sexually abused by one of her spiritual directors, who decided that he was going to make it his personal mission in life to try and convert her to heterosexuality, via sexual "counseling." She, instead, ended up in a psychiatric care facility for quite awhile. I am proud to say that all but one woman in our online support group welcomed and supported her in her healing journey, without once being critical of her sexual orientation.

In reply to an earlier post on Aug 3, 2012 6:37:38 PM PDT
No, the year after my mother died in December. There were work related things that were going on.

In reply to an earlier post on Aug 3, 2012 6:53:53 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Aug 3, 2012 7:15:53 PM PDT
Sounds like your late aunt was a wise woman. And good for you having been so accepting of her, "as is."

Posted on Aug 3, 2012 7:38:52 PM PDT
Found this interesting tidbit in Wikipedia regarding same sex marriage in Nevada. After all, they have legalized just about everything else there, right? So imagine my surprise when I learned that Nevada -- with its drive-through wedding ceremonies and Elvis impersonators, a.k.a., Hunka Hunks of Burning Love, at the ready to serenade the newly-wed couples -- has been among the stubbornest of holdouts against legalization of same sex marriage. The paradoxes of life never cease to amaze and amuse me.

Same-sex marriage in Nevada was banned in 2002 through Question 2, an amendment to the Constitution of Nevada, which passed with almost 67 percent of the vote. In 2009, the Nevada Legislature passed a bill to create legal recognition of same-sex unions in Nevada. This bill would create a domestic partnership registry that enables same-sex couples to enjoy the same rights as married couples. It would also allow opposite-sex couples to obtain the benefits of marriage without a marriage license.The bill was vetoed, as promised, by Governor Jim Gibbons, but that veto was overridden by the legislature on May 31, 2009. The law took effect on October 1, 2009.

More at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recognition_of_same-sex_unions_in_Nevada

In reply to an earlier post on Aug 3, 2012 7:39:10 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Aug 3, 2012 8:05:04 PM PDT
I think that I would say the last sentence thusly:

But abstinence from sex, of itself, is no more synonymous with ability to live a virtuous life, than having a high IQ means a person will never sin.

That analogy works better for me.

In reply to an earlier post on Aug 3, 2012 7:47:20 PM PDT
Thanks! I think this is a definite improvement.
Discussion locked

 

This discussion

Discussion in:  Christianity forum
Participants:  82
Total posts:  10000
Initial post:  Mar 21, 2012
Latest post:  Sep 2, 2012

New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made.
Tracked by 10 customers

Search Customer Discussions