Catholics & Catholicism » Roman Catholic Bishop

Greyhound buses

admin — Thu, 14 Jul 2005 00:00:00 +0000

Question:

I’m not retarded. I’m not mentally ill. I don’t like your labels. I don’t like your lies. You can’t. I can. Daniel Urtiz "Know thyself." — Socrates.

Response:

1. Why would a person lie about his age? 2. Have I ever been drunk? 3. Do you like HTV? 4. Must you see me to read this? 5. Are you a poet? Daniel Urtiz "Know thyself." — Socrates.

Response:

1. If you become Hispanic, should you keep your surname? 2. Does God require you to be Hispanic? 3. Did you choose to be a white supremist? 4. Will Andy ever become a white man? 5. Am I a white man? Daniel Urtiz "Know thyself." — Socrates.

Response:

1. Would Damodara make a good bishop? 2. Should knowledge and soundess of mind be requirements for the Roman Catholic priesthood? 3. Is the Baker Act illegal? 4. Did you knowingly break the law? 5. Does ignorance of the law excuse you from a crime? Daniel Urtiz "Know thyself." — Socrates.

Response:

1. Should a priest deal with criminals differently than a cop does? 2. Can a priest be a criminal? 3. Can a deeper friendship endure more errors? 4. Are most Americans shallow? 5. Is your script better than you are? Daniel Urtiz "Know thyself." — Socrates.

Response:

Hispanics are more concerned with goodness than with race. A racist is often not a good person. Daniel Urtiz "Know thyself." — Socrates.

Response:

Pagan. Whore. Sales. Daniel Urtiz "Know thyself." — Socrates.

Response:

When the wise man scuffled, so did the intellectuals. There was an overlap in the breach. Some wise men are smarter than others are. Daniel Urtiz "Know thyself." — Socrates.

Response:

My dad is slightly shorter than I am. He isn’t as smart as I am. I avoid telling him that. Daniel Urtiz "Know thyself." — Socrates.

Response:

Character class. Level. Attributes. Five-eyed nature. Mandalla. Texas. Belt. Daniel Urtiz "Know thyself." — Socrates.

Response:

John is a white supremist. He has a head and two arms. He’s shorter than I am. Daniel Urtiz "Know thyself." — Socrates.

Response:

Psychic healing. Typography. Laying on of the hands. Pat on the shoulder. Kiss on the forehead. Cunninglingus. Abortion. Daniel Urtiz "Know thyself." — Socrates.

Response:

Teeter Totter. Stormy Sea. SOLIDIFY. THE END OF ALL EVIL. BLOOD LIBEL. Daniel Urtiz "Know thyself." — Socrates.

Response:

1. How much do you pay for your internet service? 2. How old is Lisa Karate? 3. Does Lisa Karate mind going homeless? 4. Have things changed in world events in the last five years? 5. Does my father look better in a mustache? Daniel Urtiz "Know thyself." — Socrates.

Response:

Blood libel = Revenge, often lethal. THOROUGH. ANATHEMA PROFESSIONS. JUST WAR. Daniel Urtiz "Know thyself." — Socrates.

Response:

1. Were most of Christ’s original Apostles Jewish? 2. Did Christ have any brothers? 3. Was Saint Joseph Christ’s real father? 4. Do you believe Jesus Christ was the Son of God? 5. Should the Apostle Thomas have felt what he didn’t see with his eyes? Daniel Urtiz "Know thyself." — Socrates.

Response:

1. Can your discomfort make you ill? 2. Do you expect me to smile? 3. What is the nature of the Urtiz bloodline? 4. Have you ever killed a goat? 5. Have you ever seen the TV show "Bonanza"? Daniel Urtiz "Know thyself." — Socrates.

Response:

1. Is "Thugs in Uniform" a cute nickname for cops? 2. Can an outlaw be romantic? 3. Do you like wearing belts? 4. Can wearing boots blister your feet? 5. Did any centurians convert to Christianity? Daniel Urtiz "Know thyself." — Socrates.

Response:

1. Did you ever play Cormano? 2. Is social teching illegal? 3. Could social teching classify as fraud? 4. What are some of the characteristics of a social tech? 5. What do the Gestapo and modern cops have in common? Daniel Urtiz "Know thyself." — Socrates.

Response:

1. Can laughter make you invulnerable? 2. What is Shannon Egan’s IQ? 3. Can IQ be played as a script? 4. Are you an actor? 5. Who built your computer? Daniel Urtiz "Know thyself." — Socrates.

Response:

1. Is chronology an element of your destiny? 2. Did you have the gun before I said I wouldn’t mind carrying one? 3. Could a happy gun melee be less painful? 4. Can excessive pain make you go into shock? 5. Can shock and convulsions be somewhat of a medical myth? Daniel Urtiz "Know thyself." — Socrates.

Response:

Mostly the visage and the method. Daniel Urtiz "Know thyself." — Socrates.

Response:

It’s just a menu. I plan to travel light. Plan. Daniel Urtiz "Know thyself." — Socrates.

Response:

1. Can feigning a death be fraudulent? 2. Are mistakes always fraudulent? 3. Who approves a new Pope? 4. Should body type be a characteristic of a Pope or bishop? 5. Can a dying man earn the papacy? Daniel Urtiz "Know thyself." — Socrates.

Response:

I’m more Chinese than your cousin Guido is. Daniel Urtiz "Know thyself." — Socrates.

Response:

Exorcist/Exorcism: The Blind Leading the Blind

admin — Sun, 21 Nov 2004 00:00:00 +0000

Question:

>> BABALON 156 *** SHEDONA 435 | shed…@intrepid.net >> Exorcist/Exorcism: The Blind Leading the Blind

Keyword = Santa To point out the mindcontrol puppet / pet on a leash / impaired zombie / semi-death / fouling the free-will confusion, tricks, and conspiracy going on, whatever the truth of it turns out to be. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ruleone http://wholives.com ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Paste Follows: ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Subject: Re: Roman Catholic Exorcism Newsgroups: news:alt.christnet.demonology Submitted by: Anonymous Garibaldi <"23@90"@loc.com wrote in message

<628ch5$r3…@news.mia.bellsouth.net… Mickey wrote:

Greg, I was exorcised in 1979. It did not work. Let’s band together, and see if we can come up with some answers. From what I understand, the catholic church has disbanded most of it’s exorcism personnel, for some strange reason, in these last days. Either exorcism does not work, or either they dont want any responsibility. Hang in there, and let me know if I can help (support). There is a good reason,the Citadel of the Lord has being taken by the Enemy,naturally he does not want to have exorcists around. I recently became acquainted with a woman who went to the catholic church seeking an exorcist. She was immediately recommended for psychiatric evaluation. They told her that if she could pass that test, then they would consider an exorcism. I was not surprised. Here, below, is the attachment that I sent her: Faith wrote:

Hey "mickey" — I hope you’re still reading because I’m coming in on this one a little late … >mickey wrote: >My local minister, after intense exorcism failed, 20 years ago, >started : snarling at me, telling me that I was living in sin, which is >why they weren’t leaving. Faith wrote:

Same story 100 times over, different day. Isn’t it funny how they all do that? They can’t *DO* it, so they want *you* to pander to their need for reassurance by *faking* like it’s over. But you *can’t* fake, because the TORTURE won’t stop. And because you *can’t* fake, they interpret that as being you *WON’T* fake. But instead of "fake", they call it "acknowledge God’s power" or something like that (only it isn’t "God"’s ANYTHING; it would just be *FAKING*!) So they accuse YOU of being stubborn, obstinate, rebellious, cooperating with "the Enemy". A friend of Mine and I came up with a term for this sudden, snarling 180-degree turnabout maneuver some twelve years ago. We called it "RESORTING." So they Resort. They Resort to casting YOU out because they can’t cast "Them" out. But see, here’s the deal, mikey. The reason they do this is that their failure at exorcism sets up for THEM the very same theological paradox your experience of possession set up for you. And they cannot handle it. It utterly, completely terrifies them — the haunting, endless questions, the roller-coaster logic, the ping-pong back and forth between "blaming God" and "blaming one’s self". What is the paradox? In a nutshell, this: by all experiential reality, the "God who cannot lie" suddenly has; the "God who keeps his promises" suddenly doesn’t; the "God alone who can save" suddenly won’t, or can’t, or chooses not to — but what do the "whys" matter when you’re in PAIN??? — for whatever reason, IT ISN’T HAPPENING! WHAM, theological impasse. And no way out — for you. But for the little man of the cloth, the way out is easy: get rid of the *source* of all this troublesome, harrowing, horrifying analytical questioning before it destroys his faith. You know, I have a feeling all this happened before — mythically speaking, when a certain Brilliant Leader was hurled from the gates of His home, down through the starry skies … Mickey wrote: >Well, this was a condemnation call. I then had no >hope whatsoever, for relief, since 1979. Well, I now >feel that my experience is as a witness, for a testimony, >which is the only reason that I have made it this far. Faith wrote:

Been there, done that. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> The following is an attachment; a testimony that I received from a 28 >year old woman, from the internet. We share similar experience, as you > will read. Attachment follows: >Shiloh wrote: >I am reading a lot about people and their experience with being >labeled d+m+n-p+ssessed. I too was labeled d+mo+n p+sss-ssed >this summer. I went through three months of intense ex+rc-sm. Each >time coming out of the "session" with such a longing to die that I would >immediately seek refuge in the comfort of my warm blood. I know this >probably sounds weird, but this is just what I did. It was either >that, or standing in the middle of a river at midnight trying to wash >(baptize) myself clean. After three months of this literal h+ll I >have arisen from the dead into the light that says that I now have >even more alters than when I started working with this religious >freak. I was convinced that S=tan was inside of me and so were a lot >of my alters. I am now worse off than I ever was as far as >unification and therapy progression goes. So, all you religious >experts on p+ssessi*n and d*m*n*ology Tell me, if dem*n p*ssessi*n is >the cause of my multiplicty than why am I even more "multiple" after >such intense exorcism? and let me tell you of the reality of this >fragmented dwelling- My multiplicity is the full fledged product of >the hypocrytic church, quite contrary to your view of my submission to >S*t*n and his angels. Faith wrote:

This really hits home. Tell Shiloh I’ve been integrated for nearly two years now and LOVING it. If you are interested, either you or Shiloh or both can drop Me a line at fai…@ifaithd.net and we can continue this conversation "privately". Contrary to popular opinion, the Master and I are here to heal, not to hassle. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ One comment here: Here, Faith would appear to have sold-out, sided with the devil in order to stop the pain. The devil is a liar, and he works using deceit. I’ve seen this in my own life, where Satan attempted to try and make me think that I was siding with him, summoning him, conjuring him, selling soul. This is all just another one of this tricks, nothing but a lie. Dont’ fall for it. A person who is demon possessed cannot be held accountable, nor credible. Not capable of thought or reaction. Who lived, at the time? A demon. None of this was ever her free-will, and why would free-will ever come into the picture, in such situations? The demon that was present used a trick, to try and sell her out; he made her think that she was going along with it, just another lie. Faith was nothing more that a impaired zombie, a puppet, semi-dead, paralyzed, incapable of anything, in my own opinion and experience. Quote, "Lets make her think to sell her soul to Santa". "Who shall see it?" It’s just another mindcontrol technique, for the zombie impaired sub-concious puppets. Man, blinded pets on a leash. Who shall see it? Mickey sees it! ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ someone else had written: I believe there are a number of failures in the Catholic shedona approach to exorcism. Failure #1: Personalization of the exorist with the demon. The Catholic Church seems to view the act of exorcism as some kind of battle between the exorcist and the possessing entity. The possessed seems to be treated like an incidental character. Failure #2: Authoritarianism. The Catholic Church places authority in the hands of the Bishop. Failure #3: Ritualization. The Rituale Romanum is fraught with ritual which limits the ability of the exorcist to perform the exorcism. I believe the Catholic Church ought to go back and visit the exorcist ceremonies performed by Jesus and his apostles. They’d find no personalization, authority only from God/Jesus, minimal ritualization beyond: 1. Identifying the offending entity through interrogation. 2. Praying about the possession. 3. Using God’s/Jesus’ authority to exorcise the extity [this might include instructing the entity on where to go and where it cannot go.]

Response:

I saved this post, at: http://wholives.com/files/research/catholicexorcism.htm "av7x" wrote in message

news:BMadnWrRxrfSfT3cRVn-jA@eatel.net… – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> >> BABALON 156 *** SHEDONA 435 | shed…@intrepid.net > >> Exorcist/Exorcism: The Blind Leading the Blind > Keyword = Santa > To point out the mindcontrol puppet / pet on a leash / impaired > zombie / semi-death / fouling the free-will confusion, tricks, and > conspiracy going on, whatever the truth of it turns out to be. > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > ruleone > http://wholives.com > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > Paste Follows: > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > Subject: Re: Roman Catholic Exorcism > Newsgroups: news:alt.christnet.demonology > Submitted by: Anonymous > Garibaldi <"23@90"@loc.com wrote in message > <628ch5$r3…@news.mia.bellsouth.net… > Mickey wrote: > Greg, > I was exorcised in 1979. It did not work. Let’s band together, > and > see if we can come up with some answers. From what I understand, the > catholic church has disbanded most of it’s exorcism personnel, for some > strange reason, in these last days. Either exorcism does not work, or > either they dont want any responsibility. > Hang in there, and let me know if I can help (support). > There is a good reason,the Citadel of the Lord has being taken by the > Enemy,naturally he does not want to have exorcists around. > I recently became acquainted with a woman who went to the catholic > church seeking an exorcist. She was immediately recommended for psychiatric > evaluation. They told her that if she could pass that test, then they would > consider an exorcism. > I was not surprised. Here, below, is the attachment that I sent her: > Faith wrote: > Hey "mickey" — I hope you’re still reading because I’m coming in on this > one a little late … > >mickey wrote: > >My local minister, after intense exorcism failed, 20 years ago, > >started : snarling at me, telling me that I was living in sin, which is > >why they weren’t leaving. > Faith wrote: > Same story 100 times over, different day. Isn’t it funny how they all > do that? They can’t *DO* it, so they want *you* to pander to their need > for reassurance by *faking* like it’s over. But you *can’t* fake, because > the TORTURE won’t stop. And because you *can’t* fake, they interpret that > as being you *WON’T* fake. But instead of "fake", they call it > "acknowledge God’s power" or something like that (only it isn’t "God"’s > ANYTHING; it would just be *FAKING*!) So they accuse YOU of being stubborn, > obstinate, rebellious, cooperating with "the Enemy". A friend of Mine and I > came up with a term for this sudden, snarling 180-degree turnabout maneuver > some > twelve years ago. We called it "RESORTING." So they Resort. They > Resort to casting YOU out because they can’t cast "Them" out. > But see, here’s the deal, mikey. The reason they do this is that their > failure at exorcism sets up for THEM the very same theological paradox > your experience of possession set up for you. And they cannot handle > it. It utterly, completely terrifies them — the haunting, endless > questions, the roller-coaster logic, the ping-pong back and forth > between "blaming God" and "blaming one’s self". What is the paradox? In a > nutshell, this: by all experiential reality, the "God who cannot lie" > suddenly has; the "God who keeps his promises" suddenly doesn’t; the > "God alone who can save" suddenly won’t, or can’t, or chooses not to — but > what do the "whys" matter when you’re in PAIN??? — for whatever reason, > IT ISN’T HAPPENING! WHAM, theological impasse. And no way out — for > you. But for the little man of the cloth, the way out is easy: get rid > of the *source* of all this troublesome, harrowing, horrifying > analytical questioning before it destroys his faith. > You know, I have a feeling all this happened before — mythically > speaking, when a certain Brilliant Leader was hurled from the gates of His > home, down through the starry skies … > Mickey wrote: > >Well, this was a condemnation call. I then had no > >hope whatsoever, for relief, since 1979. Well, I now > >feel that my experience is as a witness, for a testimony, > >which is the only reason that I have made it this far. > Faith wrote: > Been there, done that. > > The following is an attachment; a testimony that I received from a 28 > >year old woman, from the internet. We share similar experience, as you > > will read. Attachment follows: > >Shiloh wrote: > >I am reading a lot about people and their experience with being > >labeled d+m+n-p+ssessed. I too was labeled d+mo+n p+sss-ssed > >this summer. I went through three months of intense ex+rc-sm. Each > >time coming out of the "session" with such a longing to die that I would > >immediately seek refuge in the comfort of my warm blood. I know this > >probably sounds weird, but this is just what I did. It was either > >that, or standing in the middle of a river at midnight trying to wash > >(baptize) myself clean. After three months of this literal h+ll I > >have arisen from the dead into the light that says that I now have > >even more alters than when I started working with this religious > >freak. I was convinced that S=tan was inside of me and so were a lot > >of my alters. I am now worse off than I ever was as far as > >unification and therapy progression goes. So, all you religious > >experts on p+ssessi*n and d*m*n*ology Tell me, if dem*n p*ssessi*n is > >the cause of my multiplicty than why am I even more "multiple" after > >such intense exorcism? and let me tell you of the reality of this > >fragmented dwelling- My multiplicity is the full fledged product of > >the hypocrytic church, quite contrary to your view of my submission to > >S*t*n and his angels. > Faith wrote: > This really hits home. Tell Shiloh I’ve been integrated for nearly two > years now and LOVING it. If you are interested, either you or Shiloh or > both can drop Me a line at fai…@ifaithd.net and we can continue this > conversation "privately". Contrary to popular opinion, the Master and I > are here to heal, not to hassle. > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > One comment here: > Here, Faith would appear to have sold-out, sided with the devil > in order to stop the pain. The devil is a liar, and he works using deceit. > I’ve > seen this in my own life, where Satan attempted to try and make me think > that I was siding with him, summoning him, conjuring him, selling soul. This > is all just another one of this tricks, nothing but a lie. Dont’ fall for > it. A person who > is demon possessed cannot be held accountable, nor credible. Not capable of > thought or reaction. Who lived, at the time? A demon. None of this was ever > her free-will, and why would free-will ever come into the picture, in such > situations? The demon that was present used a trick, to try and sell her > out; > he made her think that she was going along with it, just another lie. Faith > was > nothing more that a impaired zombie, a puppet, semi-dead, paralyzed, > incapable > of anything, in my own opinion and experience. Quote, "Lets make her think > to > sell her soul to Santa". "Who shall see it?" It’s just another mindcontrol > technique, > for the zombie impaired sub-concious puppets. Man, blinded pets on a leash. > Who shall see it? Mickey sees it! > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > someone else had written: > I believe there are a number of failures in the Catholic shedona approach to > exorcism. > Failure #1: Personalization of the exorist with the demon. > The Catholic Church seems to view the act of exorcism as some > kind of battle between the exorcist and the possessing entity. > The possessed seems to be treated like an incidental character. > Failure #2: Authoritarianism. > The Catholic Church places authority in the hands of the Bishop. > Failure #3: Ritualization. > The Rituale Romanum is fraught with ritual which limits the > ability of the exorcist to perform the exorcism. > I believe the Catholic Church ought to go back and visit the > exorcist ceremonies performed by Jesus and his apostles. They’d > find no personalization, authority only from God/Jesus, minimal > ritualization beyond: > 1. Identifying the offending entity through interrogation. > 2. Praying about the possession. > 3. Using God’s/Jesus’ authority to exorcise the extity [this might > include instructing the entity on where to go and where it > cannot go.]

Response:

The alien/demons also made someone write this: Covenant with the Deval, To sell his/her soul. It’s full of holes and discrepancy, keeps changing from first person (I) to second person (you). http://members.tripod.com/~Mishkanava/warover1.htm

Response:

I also found this: Pasted: http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Forum/1561/index2.html +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Can you believe all this bad press these days? Oy! Makes one think the world is coming to an end or something. Of course we are all waiting for *THEIRS* to finally finish ending so *OURS* can finally BEGIN, right? It’s a bit like watching the last thrashing throes of a decapitated body. Matter of fact, that’s precisely what it is, if you think about it. Anyway, enjoy your stay in the Victorious City at World’s End, the Capitol of the Marriage of Heaven and Hell. I will make easy your abstruction from its ill-ordered house. As Grace Slick once said, "Believe Me; yeah."

Response:

appears that same person or group owns this site: http://babalon.net +++++++++++++++++++++++ av7x" wrote in message

news:NfOdnZiORdVdZj3cRVn-hQ@eatel.net… – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> I also found this: > Pasted: > http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Forum/1561/index2.html > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > Can you believe all this bad press these days? Oy! Makes one think the world > is coming to an end or something. Of course we are all waiting for *THEIRS* > to finally finish ending so *OURS* can finally BEGIN, right? It’s a bit > like watching the last thrashing throes of a decapitated body. Matter of > fact, that’s precisely what it is, if you think about it. Anyway, enjoy > your stay in the Victorious City at World’s End, the Capitol of the Marriage > of Heaven and Hell. I will make easy your abstruction from its ill-ordered > house. As Grace Slick once said, "Believe Me; yeah."

Response:

Yeah, America's Evil. blah blah blah…

admin — Thu, 18 Nov 2004 00:00:00 +0000

Question:

You really are never poor if you still can laugh.

"A mind is a terrible thing to waste." – NAACP Television Campaign. George K.

Response:

In short, we love you amerikkka. Beat us, slap us around, spit in our faces and, eventually, dance on our graves. We just love you so damn much. Why feed the children when you can kill them? Peaces is so damn cheap, it’s war that’s expensive. Keep the war machine rolling amerikkka. What would all those poor contractors do without their fat government cheques? And don’t tlisten to those kooks who would like to see government money used to investigate clean energy initiatives. Those commies don’t understand the importance of an oil driven economy. Besides, there’s lots of oil left. You take as much as you want, we’ll be ahppy with the left overs.

You really are never poor if you still can laugh.

Response:

Loved this when it was new some ten to twenty years ago (which is why there is no mention of 9-11, for example) A lot of water has gone under the bridge since then, any Canadians still feel much the same about us ? If so, it would sure be nice to see an update , the below, is getting old enough to make us wonder if things have changed

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -I am sure this has appeared on the group before. I never saw it, but I have seen this letter make the rounds on the net. If it never appeared here, this would be the only place. At any rate, this is a quote from a Canadian TV Commentator named Gordon Sinclair who sums up the role America finds itself playing in the world quite nicely. He also sums up the opinions of America’s critics pretty well. His commentary follows: "This Canadian thinks it is time to speak up for the Americans as the most generous and possibly the least appreciated people on all the earth. Germany, Japan and, to a lesser extent, Britain and Italy were lifted out of the debris of war by the Americans who poured in billions of dollars and forgave other billions in debts. None of these countries is today paying even the interest on its remaining debts to the United States. When France was in danger of collapsing in 1956, it was the Americans who propped it up, and their reward was to be insulted and swindled on the streets of Paris. I was there. I saw it. When earthquakes hit distant cities, it is the United States that hurries in to help. This spring, 59 American communities were flattened by tornadoes. Nobody helped. The Marshall Plan and the Truman Policy pumped billions of dollars! into discouraged countries. Now newspapers in those countries are writing about the decadent, warmongering Americans. I’d like to see just one of those countries that is gloating over the erosion of the United States dollar build its own airplane. Does any other country in the world have a plane to equal the Boeing Jumbo Jet, the Lockheed Tri-Star, or the Douglas DC10? If so, why don’t they fly them? Why do all the International lines except Russia fly American Planes? Why does no other land on earth even consider putting a man or woman on the moon? You talk about Japanese technocracy, and you get radios. You talk about German technocracy, and you get automobiles. You talk about American technocracy, and you find men on the moon not once, but several times – and safely home again. You talk about scandals, and the Americans put theirs right in the store window for everybody to look at. Even their draft-dodgers are not pursued and hounded. They are here on our streets, and most of them, unless they are breaking Canadian laws, are getting American dollars from ma and pa at home to spend here. When the railways of France, Germany and India were breaking down through age, it was the Americans who rebuilt them. When the Pennsylvania Railroad and the New York Central went broke, nobody loaned them an old caboose. Both are still broke. I can name you 5000 times when the Americans raced to the help of other people in trouble. Can you name me even one time when someone else raced to the Americans in trouble? I don’t think there was outside help even during the San Francisco earthquake. Our neighbors have faced it alone, and I’m one Canadian who is damned tired of hearing them get kicked around. They will come out of this thing with their flag high. And when they do, they are entitled to thumb their nose at the lands that are gloating over their present troubles. I hope Canada is not one of those." Stand proud, America!

Response:

… whatever … The USA the only country in the world to nuke a civilian population … TWICE!!!! "I am not a crook!" – Richard "Tricky Dicky" Nixon God save us from America! MUSIC CENSORSHIP IN THE USA – 1950 till the present …. 1952 The Weavers are blacklisted due to the leftist political beliefs and associations of several members. 1953 … Six counties in South Carolina pass legislation outlawing jukebox operation anytime when within hearing distance of a church. 1954 Stephen Foster songs are edited for radio to remove words such as "massa" and "darky." … For radio airplay the perceived drug reference "I get no kick from cocaine," is changed to "I get perfume from Spain." in Cole Porter’s classic "I Get A Kick Out of You." … 1955 Former radio deejay Pat Boone begins a career by releasing "sanitized" versions of black R&B hits. Boone’s versions of these songs often contain edited lyrics: such as substituting "drinkin’ Coca Cola" for "drinkin’ wine" in T-Bone Walker’s "Stormy Monday" and "Pretty little Susie is the girl for me" instead of "Boys, don’t you know what she do to me" in Little Richard’s "Tutti Fruitti." … CBS television network cancels Alan Freed’s Rock ‘n Roll Dance Party after a camera shows Frankie Lymon (leader of the doo wop group Frankie Lymon & The Teenagers) dancing with a white girl. Officials in San Diego and Florida police warn Elvis Presley that if he moves at all during his local performances, he will be arrested on obscenity charges. 1956 ABC Radio Network bans Billie Holiday’s rendition of Cole Porter’s "Love for Sale" from all of its stations because of its prostitution theme. Stations continue to play instrumental versions of the song. …. The Parks Department in San Antonio, Texas, removes all rock and roll records from jukeboxes located at city swimming pools, terming it "jumpy, hot stuff" that is unsuitable for teens. … 1957 Producers of the Ed Sullivan Show instruct cameramen to show Elvis Presley only from the waist up on his third and final appearance on the program on January 7th. Fearing the effects of the "hedonistic, tribal rhythms" of rock and roll music, in March Chicago’s Cardinal Stritch bans popular music from all Catholic-run schools. … 1958 The Mutual Broadcasting System drops all rock and roll records from its network music programs, calling it "distorted, monotonous, noisy music." … 1962 New York Bishop Burke forbids Catholic school students from dancing to "The Twist." Burke considers R&B music, and its associated dances, to be lewd and un-Christian. 1963 The FBI begins collecting data on folk singers Phil Ochs. Ochs is one of several popular musicians to be tracked by the FBI during their careers (Bob Dylan, Jim Morrison, Pete Seeger and Woody Guthrie). Bob Dylan refuses to perform on the Ed Sullivan Show in February after producers tell him he cannot sing "Talking John Birch Paranoid Blues." Dylan is never invited to perform on the show again. … 1965 … Cleveland Mayor Ralph Locher bans all rock concerts in the city following a Rolling Stones performance. The Barry McGuire song "Eve of Destruction" is pulled from retail stores and radio stations across the country after some groups complain that it is nihilistic and could promote suicidal feelings amongst teens. … 1966 … A statement by John Lennon in March, comparing the popularity of the Beatles to that of Jesus Christ, results in wide-spread Beatles record burnings and protests. Lennon’s comments regarding what he perceives as a decrease in Christianity’s popularity with teens are taken out of context. He says, "We’re more popular than Jesus now." … In June, Capitol Records recalls all copies of the Beatles’ Yesterday And Today album following complaints over the album’s gory cover art. The "butcher" cover depicts the four Beatles wearing white smocks and covered with decapitated baby dolls and raw meat. Police attempt to shut down a James Brown concert, alleging the singer’s dancing is obscene. … 1967 The Rolling Stones agree to alter the lyrics to "Let’s Spend The Night Together" for an appearance on the Ed Sullivan Show in January. Producers request that singer Mick Jagger alter the title phrase to "Let’s spend some time together." … Producers of the Ed Sullivan Show request that Jim Morrison change the lyrics to "Light My Fire" for The Doors’ September appearance on the program. Morrison initially agrees to alter the lyric "Girl we couldn’t get much higher" to a more innocuous phrase. During the live performance, Morrison sings the original lyric. The band is not invited back on the program. 1968 An El Paso, Texas, radio station bans all songs performed by Bob Dylan because they cannot understand the folk singer’s lyrics. The station continues to play recordings of Dylan songs performed by other artists with clearer diction. The Doors’ single "Unknown Soldier" is banned from airplay at many radio stations because of its anti-war theme. Sponsors go into an uproar and threaten to pull support after a television program shows interracial "touching." During the taping of a duet between Petula Clark and Harry Belafonte, Clark lays her hand on Belafonte’s arm (Clark is white and Belafonte is black). … After being invited by the Smothers Brothers to perform his anti-Vietnam anthem "Waist Deep in the Big Muddy" on their TV show, Pete Seeger is edited out of the program by the censors at CBS television. 1969 In January, New York police seize 30,000 copies of John Lennon and Yoko Ono’s Two Virgins album. … In September, the local Roman Catholic Diocese runs a two-page ad spread in the Seattle Post Intelligencer calling for the criminal prosecution of rock musicians and for bans against "rock festivals and their drug-sex-rock-squalor culture." … In July, one-half of the country’s Top 40 stations refuse to play "The Ballad of John and Yoko" because they feel that the lyrics are blasphemous. The song’s lyrics contain references to Christ and crucifixion. … 1970 … A group known as the Movement to Restore Democracy calls for the banning of rock music to end the spread of Socialism in America. … Claiming that he fears the song "Ohio" will incite further violence on college campuses following the killing of four students at Kent State University, Governor James Rhodes attempts to order Ohio radio stations to ban the song. … Country Joe McDonald is fined $500 for uttering an obscenity during a concert performance of his song "I Feel Like I’m Fixin’ To Die Rag." Janis Joplin is fined $200 for violating local profanity and obscenity laws for her performance after a concert in Tampa, Florida. 1971 Several radio stations alter the John Lennon song "Working Class Hero" without the consent of Lennon or his record label. Radio stations across the U.S. ban Bob Dylan’s single "George Jackson" over concerns about the song’s political theme and the word "shit" in its lyrics. …. In April, the Illinois Crime Commission publishes a list of popular rock songs that contain drug references, including Peter, Paul and Mary’s "Puff The Magic Dragon" and the Beatles’ "Yellow Submarine." Chrysalis Records changes the lyrics to Jethro Tull’s "Locomotive Breath" without the band’s knowledge or consent. Label executives fear radio stations will not play the original, which contains the lyric "got him by the balls." … 1972 In January, the Senate Internal Security Subcommittee issues a report on John Lennon and Yoko Ono, advocating the termination of Lennon’s visa to live in the U.S. The report calls the couple "strong advocates of the program to ‘dump Nixon’." … John Lennon’s song "Woman is the Nigger of the World" is banned by radio stations across the country. Radio stations across the country ban John Denver’s hit song "Rocky Mountain High," fearing that the song’s "high" refers to drugs. … 1975 Radio stations across the country refuse to play Loretta Lynn’s "The Pill" because of its references to birth control. … 1977 The Reverend Jesse Jackson calls for bans against disco music, insisting the music promotes promiscuity and drug use. … 1980 Fearing association with its theme, Mercury Records refuses to release Frank Zappa’s single "I Don’t Wanna Get Drafted." … In October, Youth Minister Art Diaz organizes a group of local teenagers who conduct a record burning at the First Assembly Church of God in Des Moines, Iowa, including albums by the Beatles, Ravi Shankar, Peter Frampton, and the soundtrack to the movie Grease. A similar burning takes place a few months later in Keoku, Iowa, where a church group burns the work of The Carpenters, John Denver, and Perry Como. … 1982 Ozzy Osbourne is forbidden from performing in San Antonio, Texas, after he is arrested for urinating on the Alamo. Osbourne’s various legal troubles also prevent him from playing in several other cities, including Boston, Baton Rouge, Corpus Christi, Las Vegas, and Philadelphia and Scranton, Pennsylvania. California assemblyman Phil Wyman introduces a bill to outlaw the practice of including subliminal messages in rock records. … 1983 Roger Wilcher, a Baptist youth minister in Emporia, Virginia, petitions the city council to remove MTV from the local cable system. Voice of America programmer Frank Scott issues a directive to staff that they are not permitted to play music which might offend any portion of their audience. 1984 …. Dade Christian School in Miami, Florida, forbids students from attending a local concert by the Jackson Brothers, because they fear it will lead the youth to use drugs, drink, behave irresponsibly, and participate in lewd dancing. Any student who attends the concert is guaranteed fifteen demerits. Critics call for boycotts of Bruce … read more »

Response:

Gordon Sinclair died in 1984. This speech was broadcast on June 5, 1973 during his radio program. And it was about the decline of the US dollar. — – zaphod "Count the heads, baby."

Doesn’t change the sentiment that he expressed about America’s character as a nation, and it hasn’t changed in the last twenty years….only the absurdity level of its critics have. Chuck Stamford – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -I am sure this has appeared on the group before. I never saw it, but I have seen this letter make the rounds on the net. If it never appeared here, this would be the only place. At any rate, this is a quote from a Canadian TV Commentator named Gordon Sinclair who sums up the role America finds itself playing in the world quite nicely. He also sums up the opinions of America’s critics pretty well. His commentary follows: "This Canadian thinks it is time to speak up for the Americans as the most generous and possibly the least appreciated people on all the earth. Germany, Japan and, to a lesser extent, Britain and Italy were lifted out of the debris of war by the Americans who poured in billions of dollars and forgave other billions in debts. None of these countries is today paying even the interest on its remaining debts to the United States. When France was in danger of collapsing in 1956, it was the Americans who propped it up, and their reward was to be insulted and swindled on the streets of Paris. I was there. I saw it. When earthquakes hit distant cities, it is the United States that hurries in to help. This spring, 59 American communities were flattened by tornadoes. Nobody helped. The Marshall Plan and the Truman Policy pumped billions of dollars! into discouraged countries. Now newspapers in those countries are writing about the decadent, warmongering Americans. I’d like to see just one of those countries that is gloating over the erosion of the United States dollar build its own airplane. Does any other country in the world have a plane to equal the Boeing Jumbo Jet, the Lockheed Tri-Star, or the Douglas DC10? If so, why don’t they fly them? Why do all the International lines except Russia fly American Planes? Why does no other land on earth even consider putting a man or woman on the moon? You talk about Japanese technocracy, and you get radios. You talk about German technocracy, and you get automobiles. You talk about American technocracy, and you find men on the moon not once, but several times – and safely home again. You talk about scandals, and the Americans put theirs right in the store window for everybody to look at. Even their draft-dodgers are not pursued and hounded. They are here on our streets, and most of them, unless they are breaking Canadian laws, are getting American dollars from ma and pa at home to spend here. When the railways of France, Germany and India were breaking down through age, it was the Americans who rebuilt them. When the Pennsylvania Railroad and the New York Central went broke, nobody loaned them an old caboose. Both are still broke. I can name you 5000 times when the Americans raced to the help of other people in trouble. Can you name me even one time when someone else raced to the Americans in trouble? I don’t think there was outside help even during the San Francisco earthquake. Our neighbors have faced it alone, and I’m one Canadian who is damned tired of hearing them get kicked around. They will come out of this thing with their flag high. And when they do, they are entitled to thumb their nose at the lands that are gloating over their present troubles. I hope Canada is not one of those." Stand proud, America!

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Must have just taken a shower… America sees a Saudi is their main adversary, Therefore they demonise an Iraqi America sees Saudis drive planes into their homeland, killing thousands, Therefore they invade Iraq America is the world’s biggest polluter Therefore they try to sell oil advice to Iraq after failing to steal the oil in sufficient number I am sure this has appeared on the group before. I never saw it, but I have seen this letter make the rounds on the net. If it never appeared here, this would be the only place. At any rate, this is a quote from a Canadian TV Commentator named Gordon Sinclair who sums up the role America finds itself playing in the world quite nicely. He also sums up the opinions of America’s critics pretty well. His commentary follows: "This Canadian thinks it is time to speak up for the Americans as the most generous and possibly the least appreciated people on all the earth. Germany, Japan and, to a lesser extent, Britain and Italy were lifted out of the debris of war by the Americans who poured in billions of dollars and forgave other billions in debts. None of these countries is today paying even the interest on its remaining debts to the United States. When France was in danger of collapsing in 1956, it was the Americans who propped it up, and their reward was to be insulted and swindled on the streets of Paris. I was there. I saw it. When earthquakes hit distant cities, it is the United States that hurries in to help. This spring, 59 American communities were flattened by tornadoes. Nobody helped. The Marshall Plan and the Truman Policy pumped billions of dollars! into discouraged countries. Now newspapers in those countries are writing about the decadent, warmongering Americans. I’d like to see just one of those countries that is gloating over the erosion of the United States dollar build its own airplane. Does any other country in the world have a plane to equal the Boeing Jumbo Jet, the Lockheed Tri-Star, or the Douglas DC10? If so, why don’t they fly them? Why do all the International lines except Russia fly American Planes? Why does no other land on earth even consider putting a man or woman on the moon? You talk about Japanese technocracy, and you get radios. You talk about German technocracy, and you get automobiles. You talk about American technocracy, and you find men on the moon not once, but several times – and safely home again. You talk about scandals, and the Americans put theirs right in the store window for everybody to look at. Even their draft-dodgers are not pursued and hounded. They are here on our streets, and most of them, unless they are breaking Canadian laws, are getting American dollars from ma and pa at home to spend here. When the railways of France, Germany and India were breaking down through age, it was the Americans who rebuilt them. When the Pennsylvania Railroad and the New York Central went broke, nobody loaned them an old caboose. Both are still broke. I can name you 5000 times when the Americans raced to the help of other people in trouble. Can you name me even one time when someone else raced to the Americans in trouble? I don’t think there was outside help even during the San Francisco earthquake. Our neighbors have faced it alone, and I’m one Canadian who is damned tired of hearing them get kicked around. They will come out of this thing with their flag high. And when they do, they are entitled to thumb their nose at the lands that are gloating over their present troubles. I hope Canada is not one of those." Stand proud, America!

A truly amazing sentiment from Canada! My hats off to Ron Boutwell for supplying this little ray of sunshine from Gordon Sinclair out of the gloomy land of anti-American rhetoric run amok. I would like to correct one thing though. Sinclair asked, "I can name you 5000 times when the Americans raced to the help of other people in trouble. Can you name me even one time when someone else raced to the Americans in trouble?" I don’t know if "raced" would be the appropriate word, but the French did blockade the port at Yorktown in 1781, thus cutting off Cornwallis’ last means of retreat from his last strong point in America, and probably shortened the war for American independence by several days or weeks. Didn’t affect the outcome by any means, but it was a nice gesture that actually cost the French something to make. Oh, and let’s not forget that lovely statue! Darn nice decoration that…and well made too. But that’s the only time I can think of when some nation actually helped America when it was in trouble. Oh, and Norwood Holden can go suck an egg. Chuck Stamford

Response:

Gordon Sinclair died in 1984. This speech was broadcast on June 5, 1973 during his radio program. And it was about the decline of the US dollar. — – zaphod "Count the heads, baby." – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -I am sure this has appeared on the group before. I never saw it, but I have seen this letter make the rounds on the net. If it never appeared here, this would be the only place. At any rate, this is a quote from a Canadian TV Commentator named Gordon Sinclair who sums up the role America finds itself playing in the world quite nicely. He also sums up the opinions of America’s critics pretty well. His commentary follows: "This Canadian thinks it is time to speak up for the Americans as the most generous and possibly the least appreciated people on all the earth. Germany, Japan and, to a lesser extent, Britain and Italy were lifted out of the debris of war by the Americans who poured in billions of dollars and forgave other billions in debts. None of these countries is today paying even the interest on its remaining debts to the United States. When France was in danger of collapsing in 1956, it was the Americans who propped it up, and their reward was to be insulted and swindled on the streets of Paris. I was there. I saw it. When earthquakes hit distant cities, it is the United States that hurries in to help. This spring, 59 American communities were flattened by tornadoes. Nobody helped. The Marshall Plan and the Truman Policy pumped billions of dollars! into discouraged countries. Now newspapers in those countries are writing about the decadent, warmongering Americans. I’d like to see just one of those countries that is gloating over the erosion of the United States dollar build its own airplane. Does any other country in the world have a plane to equal the Boeing Jumbo Jet, the Lockheed Tri-Star, or the Douglas DC10? If so, why don’t they fly them? Why do all the International lines except Russia fly American Planes? Why does no other land on earth even consider putting a man or woman on the moon? You talk about Japanese technocracy, and you get radios. You talk about German technocracy, and you get automobiles. You talk about American technocracy, and you find men on the moon not once, but several times – and safely home again. You talk about scandals, and the Americans put theirs right in the store window for everybody to look at. Even their draft-dodgers are not pursued and hounded. They are here on our streets, and most of them, unless they are breaking Canadian laws, are getting American dollars from ma and pa at home to spend here. When the railways of France, Germany and India were breaking down through age, it was the Americans who rebuilt them. When the Pennsylvania Railroad and the New York Central went broke, nobody loaned them an old caboose. Both are still broke. I can name you 5000 times when the Americans raced to the help of other people in trouble. Can you name me even one time when someone else raced to the Americans in trouble? I don’t think there was outside help even during the San Francisco earthquake. Our neighbors have faced it alone, and I’m one Canadian who is damned tired of hearing them get kicked around. They will come out of this thing with their flag high. And when they do, they are entitled to thumb their nose at the lands that are gloating over their present troubles. I hope Canada is not one of those." Stand proud, America!

Response:

I am sure this has appeared on the group before. I never saw it, but I have seen this letter make the rounds on the net. If it never appeared here, this would be the only place. At any rate, this is a quote from a Canadian TV Commentator named Gordon Sinclair who sums up the role America finds itself playing in the world quite nicely. He also sums up the opinions of America’s critics pretty well. His commentary follows: "This Canadian thinks it is time to speak up for the Americans as the most generous and possibly the least appreciated people on all the earth. Germany, Japan and, to a lesser extent, Britain and Italy were lifted out of the debris of war by the Americans who poured in billions of dollars and forgave other billions in debts. None of these countries is today paying even the interest on its remaining debts to the United States. When France was in danger of collapsing in 1956, it was the Americans who propped it up, and their reward was to be insulted and swindled on the streets of Paris. I was there. I saw it. When earthquakes hit distant cities, it is the United States that hurries in to help. This spring, 59 American communities were flattened by tornadoes. Nobody helped. The Marshall Plan and the Truman Policy pumped billions of dollars! into discouraged countries. Now newspapers in those countries are writing about the decadent, warmongering Americans. I’d like to see just one of those countries that is gloating over the erosion of the United States dollar build its own airplane. Does any other country in the world have a plane to equal the Boeing Jumbo Jet, the Lockheed Tri-Star, or the Douglas DC10? If so, why don’t they fly them? Why do all the International lines except Russia fly American Planes? Why does no other land on earth even consider putting a man or woman on the moon? You talk about Japanese technocracy, and you get radios. You talk about German technocracy, and you get automobiles. You talk about American technocracy, and you find men on the moon not once, but several times – and safely home again. You talk about scandals, and the Americans put theirs right in the store window for everybody to look at. Even their draft-dodgers are not pursued and hounded. They are here on our streets, and most of them, unless they are breaking Canadian laws, are getting American dollars from ma and pa at home to spend here. When the railways of France, Germany and India were breaking down through age, it was the Americans who rebuilt them. When the Pennsylvania Railroad and the New York Central went broke, nobody loaned them an old caboose. Both are still broke. I can name you 5000 times when the Americans raced to the help of other people in trouble. Can you name me even one time when someone else raced to the Americans in trouble? I don’t think there was outside help even during the San Francisco earthquake. Our neighbors have faced it alone, and I’m one Canadian who is damned tired of hearing them get kicked around. They will come out of this thing with their flag high. And when they do, they are entitled to thumb their nose at the lands that are gloating over their present troubles. I hope Canada is not one of those." Stand proud, America!

Response:

And the BBC has all the truth? Hehe.. Take care www.freemasonry911.com

Response:

Must have just taken a shower…

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – America sees a Saudi is their main adversary, Therefore they demonise an Iraqi America sees Saudis drive planes into their homeland, killing thousands, Therefore they invade Iraq America is the world’s biggest polluter Therefore they try to sell oil advice to Iraq after failing to steal the oil in sufficient number I am sure this has appeared on the group before. I never saw it, but I have seen this letter make the rounds on the net. If it never appeared here, this would be the only place. At any rate, this is a quote from a Canadian TV Commentator named Gordon Sinclair who sums up the role America finds itself playing in the world quite nicely. He also sums up the opinions of America’s critics pretty well. His commentary follows: "This Canadian thinks it is time to speak up for the Americans as the most generous and possibly the least appreciated people on all the earth. Germany, Japan and, to a lesser extent, Britain and Italy were lifted out of the debris of war by the Americans who poured in billions of dollars and forgave other billions in debts. None of these countries is today paying even the interest on its remaining debts to the United States. When France was in danger of collapsing in 1956, it was the Americans who propped it up, and their reward was to be insulted and swindled on the streets of Paris. I was there. I saw it. When earthquakes hit distant cities, it is the United States that hurries in to help. This spring, 59 American communities were flattened by tornadoes. Nobody helped. The Marshall Plan and the Truman Policy pumped billions of dollars! into discouraged countries. Now newspapers in those countries are writing about the decadent, warmongering Americans. I’d like to see just one of those countries that is gloating over the erosion of the United States dollar build its own airplane. Does any other country in the world have a plane to equal the Boeing Jumbo Jet, the Lockheed Tri-Star, or the Douglas DC10? If so, why don’t they fly them? Why do all the International lines except Russia fly American Planes? Why does no other land on earth even consider putting a man or woman on the moon? You talk about Japanese technocracy, and you get radios. You talk about German technocracy, and you get automobiles. You talk about American technocracy, and you find men on the moon not once, but several times – and safely home again. You talk about scandals, and the Americans put theirs right in the store window for everybody to look at. Even their draft-dodgers are not pursued and hounded. They are here on our streets, and most of them, unless they are breaking Canadian laws, are getting American dollars from ma and pa at home to spend here. When the railways of France, Germany and India were breaking down through age, it was the Americans who rebuilt them. When the Pennsylvania Railroad and the New York Central went broke, nobody loaned them an old caboose. Both are still broke. I can name you 5000 times when the Americans raced to the help of other people in trouble. Can you name me even one time when someone else raced to the Americans in trouble? I don’t think there was outside help even during the San Francisco earthquake. Our neighbors have faced it alone, and I’m one Canadian who is damned tired of hearing them get kicked around. They will come out of this thing with their flag high. And when they do, they are entitled to thumb their nose at the lands that are gloating over their present troubles. I hope Canada is not one of those." Stand proud, America!

Response:

America sees a Saudi is their main adversary, Therefore they demonise an Iraqi America sees Saudis drive planes into their homeland, killing thousands, Therefore they invade Iraq America is the world’s biggest polluter Therefore they try to sell oil advice to Iraq after failing to steal the oil in sufficient number – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I am sure this has appeared on the group before. I never saw it, but I have seen this letter make the rounds on the net. If it never appeared here, this would be the only place. At any rate, this is a quote from a Canadian TV Commentator named Gordon Sinclair who sums up the role America finds itself playing in the world quite nicely. He also sums up the opinions of America’s critics pretty well. His commentary follows: "This Canadian thinks it is time to speak up for the Americans as the most generous and possibly the least appreciated people on all the earth. Germany, Japan and, to a lesser extent, Britain and Italy were lifted out of the debris of war by the Americans who poured in billions of dollars and forgave other billions in debts. None of these countries is today paying even the interest on its remaining debts to the United States. When France was in danger of collapsing in 1956, it was the Americans who propped it up, and their reward was to be insulted and swindled on the streets of Paris. I was there. I saw it. When earthquakes hit distant cities, it is the United States that hurries in to help. This spring, 59 American communities were flattened by tornadoes. Nobody helped. The Marshall Plan and the Truman Policy pumped billions of dollars! into discouraged countries. Now newspapers in those countries are writing about the decadent, warmongering Americans. I’d like to see just one of those countries that is gloating over the erosion of the United States dollar build its own airplane. Does any other country in the world have a plane to equal the Boeing Jumbo Jet, the Lockheed Tri-Star, or the Douglas DC10? If so, why don’t they fly them? Why do all the International lines except Russia fly American Planes? Why does no other land on earth even consider putting a man or woman on the moon? You talk about Japanese technocracy, and you get radios. You talk about German technocracy, and you get automobiles. You talk about American technocracy, and you find men on the moon not once, but several times – and safely home again. You talk about scandals, and the Americans put theirs right in the store window for everybody to look at. Even their draft-dodgers are not pursued and hounded. They are here on our streets, and most of them, unless they are breaking Canadian laws, are getting American dollars from ma and pa at home to spend here. When the railways of France, Germany and India were breaking down through age, it was the Americans who rebuilt them. When the Pennsylvania Railroad and the New York Central went broke, nobody loaned them an old caboose. Both are still broke. I can name you 5000 times when the Americans raced to the help of other people in trouble. Can you name me even one time when someone else raced to the Americans in trouble? I don’t think there was outside help even during the San Francisco earthquake. Our neighbors have faced it alone, and I’m one Canadian who is damned tired of hearing them get kicked around. They will come out of this thing with their flag high. And when they do, they are entitled to thumb their nose at the lands that are gloating over their present troubles. I hope Canada is not one of those." Stand proud, America!

Response:

Catholics and the holocaust

admin — Thu, 11 Nov 2004 00:00:00 +0000

Question:

@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net: – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Yes… the truth that Catholics as well as Jews were killed in camps as Poland was invaded… the fact that Hitler was excommunicated from the Roman Catholic Church by his actions… the fact that millions of Catholics went to war against Germany, Italy, and Japan… You point to a handful of Catholics in the camps as if that means anything in the scheme of what went on. Maybe if the Pope had said something those millions of Polish and Ukrainian Catholics wouldn’t gone along with the slaughter of the Jews in Poland. 3 million is a mite more than a handful.

I want to see a cite that shows that 3 million Catholics died in the camps because they were Catholic. — Bush is not my President.

Response:

Ever notice how the Catholic culties get real quiet when the truth of the church and their response to the holocaust comes up? Not really. The Church and the Pope did an awful lot to relieve the pain and suffering.

Nonsense. They did little more than wave bye-bye. — Bush is not my President.

Response:

He didn’t, and they did. — Bush is not my President.

Response:

But let’s not forget that most other large institutions – eg the Lutheran church and most nation-states – have a similarly spotty record.

I have a real problem with the argument "yes, but they were just as bad". The RCC was the largest non-national power in Europe. They could and should have taken a stronger stand if they didn’t wish to be seen as going along.. — Bush is not my President.

Response:

If the Pope targetted Hitler or any of his allies, the entire Church would have been persecuted. If the Pope said "stand up and fight" what would have stopped them from turning against catholics who stood up and faught? The Pope is responsible for the well-being of the Church. The Pope is an individual. You act as though he isn’t…

So the position of the church is to abandon its principles in the face of persecution? I wonder how Jesus would have felt about such a morally tepid stance. Again, this 45 million people died figure arises. Not only Jews died. Those who faught to end the war were killed too. Let’s not foget about those men who bravely faught to end this war…

Lots of people got killed. Most of them were Russians, Poles, and Germans. I am not even really going to say anything about this. The Catholic Church post Vatican II has reformed to hold dear to her heart the santity of life. It was a WAR. The Roman Catholic Church does NOT have an ARMY. Political wars, despite there being rooted in religious-genocide, must be battled with nations that have armies.

Apparently it didn’t have much of a moral stance on the war either. You plea that it was done to protect the chuch is kind of pathetic. — Bush is not my President.

Response:

You point to a handful of Catholics in the camps as if that means anything in the scheme of what went on. Maybe if the Pope had said something those millions of Polish and Ukrainian Catholics wouldn’t gone along with the slaughter of the Jews in Poland. The President of the United States didn’t say anything. And, unlike the Pope, he had something other than a few alter boys to throw at the concentration camps.

The POTUS was a poltician. The Pope was (supposedly) the spiritual leader of at least half of Europe. — Bush is not my President.

Response:

How could things have gotten any worse for the Jews? I can’t believe the double-think that allows you to put forward this position. The fact is that he went along aith the Nazis, and did very little other than some token saves of a few Jews. — Bush is not my President.

Response:

It was no more true for the Catholic church than most every other religious & secular organization in the west.

Of course it is noteworthy. It was in those countries which were most Catholic that the Jews were also treated badly – Poland come to mind. You know what helped Hitler more than anything that the Pope could imagine? The Neutrality act, passed by congress and signed by the President.

Nobody has said the Pope helped Hitler. He simply went along and didn’t do his job. — Bush is not my President.

Response:

The point I had made — and I hate having to defend the Catholic church — is that this was not the least bit noteworthy. It was no more true for the Catholic church than most every other religious & secular organization in the west. You know what helped Hitler more than anything that the Pope could imagine? The Neutrality act, passed by congress and signed by the President. Although it’s true that Roosevelt wanted to get the U.S. into the war, the political realities were such that he just couldn’t do it. Many forces in America took it much further. Prescott Bush — grandfather of our present day King George — and Henry Ford were two American supporters of the NAZIs. Shell Oil — the old "Royal Dutch Shell" company" — had a love affiar with Hitler. Texaco did as well, but not to the extant that Shell did. The Chairman of Shell constituted a one-man Hitler fan club.

Response:

It is far more likely that the Catholic Church wasn’t all that upset about the loss of the Jews. After all, they had worked on the problem for hundreds of years without a "final solution".

Mentioning that little fact undermines your whole argument to the point of collapse. The Church had hundreds of years of complete dominance in Europe, if it had wanted to eliminate the Jews it would have done so, just like it did to Mithraism and all the other religions that existed at the end of the Roman era. So why didn’t she? The historically literate know the answer. The Church deliberately protected Judaism, tolerating it like no other rival religion, allowing the Jews to maintain their culture and thrive. As for the Pope during WW2, he did everything he could to oppose the Nazis and save as many Jews as possible. But don’t take my word for it, listen to Golda Meir, At Pope Pius XII death in 1958, Golda Meir sent an eloquent message: "We share in the grief of humanity. When fearful martyrdom came to our people in the decade of Nazi terror, the voice of the pope was raised for its victims. The life of our times was enriched by a voice speaking out about great moral truths above the tumult of daily conflict. We mourn a great servant of peace."

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – You point to a handful of Catholics in the camps as if that means anything in the scheme of what went on. Maybe if the Pope had said something those millions of Polish and Ukrainian Catholics wouldn’t gone along with the slaughter of the Jews in Poland. The President of the United States didn’t say anything. And, unlike the Pope, he had something other than a few alter boys to throw at the concentration camps. As a matter of fact, the only allied bombings of concentration camps targeted the industry employing the prisoners as slave labor, and killed many of those prisoners.

kind of off topic but I recommend reading a book called A Man Called Intrepid (William Stephenson/Stevenson?). It outlines a lot of the things Roosevelt was trying to do behind the scenes (as well as why he was behind the scenes).

Response:

JMJ "Sean C" wrote – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – "Dave Lister" wrote Ever notice how the Catholic culties get real quiet when the truth of the church and their response to the holocaust comes up? I hate to say it — being an early escapee from the Catholic church — but it’s all a bunch of bullshit. The Catholic church was (and remains) psychotically anti-Communist, due almost entirely to the fact that Communist Russia was an officially atheistic state. But, they were no more "pro-Nazi" than any other Christian church on the European continent, or religious & secular groups here in the United States. In fairness, he didn’t say the Church was pro-Nazi, but criticized the Church for its response to the Holocaust. There is little doubt on any side of the debate that Pius XII failed to speak out aginst the Holocaust. Whether his sins were those of ommission or commission is where the debate really centers. snip<

Regarding the relationship between Pius XII and the Jews. As far as the (accusation of) silence is concerned, we know very well that any public protest against Nazism would have provoked a disaster. Not only against the Catholics but, especially, against the Jews. Here’s an exerpt from "The Real Story of Pius XII and the Jews on the subject By James Bogle {Barrister of the Middle Temple, and former Cavalry officer) snip<

Pius XII intended to followed the Dutch Roman Catholic hierarchy’s plan of nameing the Jews explicitly in their condemnation of Nazi deportations, he intended to issue a similar statement. The Nazis threatened to arrest more Jews. The Dutch Reformed Church agreed not to protest openly but the Roman Catholic hierarchy issued, in April 1942, their famous protest against the deportations. The Nazis then launched an all-out offensive against Jews (except those who had converted to the Dutch Protestant Reformed Church). Ironically, it was the Dutch hierarchy’s letter of open condemnation which led to the arrest and execution of Edith Stein, the Jewish Roman Catholic nun and philosopher and Anne Frank. (By the end of WWII 86% of Amsterdams Jews had been sent to German Concentration camps as compared to 28% of Rome’s Jews, jc) The news of the increased persecution reached Pius XII. His own protest was due to go into "L’Osservatore Romano" that very evening but he had the draft burnt saying "If the protest of the Dutch Bishops has cost the lives of 40,000 people, my intervention would take at least 200,000 people to their deaths." (See "11 Seitimanale", 1 March 1975, p.40.) (This testimony for the Beatification Tribunal was placed on the record for the canonization process of Pope Pius the 12th, by Mother Pasqualina, a nun who served for many years as Pacelli’s housekeeper,jc) Such was the result of openly naming the Jews; more death from vain gestures. There is no doubt that if Pius XII had made such a vain gesture, instead of saving more Jewish lives, he would then have been open to the criticism of having made the situation of Jews worse by vain and inopportune public statements. Those who now criticise him for not saying enough would then have attacked him for saying too much. snip<

unquote Jim Carew sfo

Response:

He did, and they didn’t. duke ***** Matthew 22 14"For many are invited, but few are chosen." *****

Response:

Ever notice how the Catholic culties get real quiet when the truth of the church and their response to the holocaust comes up?

Not really. The Church and the Pope did an awful lot to relieve the pain and suffering. duke ***** Matthew 22 14"For many are invited, but few are chosen." *****

Response:

3 million is a mite more than a handful.

Response:

Approach this in two things: There are letters and reports from those who were close to Pope Pius that proved he was against the Nazi regime and feared for teh destruction of the Church in Europe. Those serving by him wanted him to be moved to America. He would not submit to fear! The actions of these Nazi and Fascist leaders meritted excoummincation automatically. Hitler wasn’t Catholic. He claimed so himself: 27th February, 1942, midday: It would always be disagreeable for me to go down to posterity as a man who made concessions in this field. I realize that man, in his imperfection, can commit innumerable errors– but to devote myself deliberately to errors, that is something I cannot do. I shall never come personally to terms with the Christian lie. Our epoch Uin the next 200 yearse will certainly see the end of the disease of Christianity…. My regret will have been that I couldn’t… behold its demise." (p 278) Then we ask ourselves was Hitler excommunicated? It doesn’t matter whether a formal excommunication occurred. Hitler was already excommunicated ipso facto, under the canon law of the Catholic Church for his sinful crimes. He could only return if the Pope himself removed the excommunication (latae sententiae). Even more, the conference of German bishops excommunicated ALL Nazis in 1930 and in 1932, forbade Catholics to vote for Nazis. Just the way you are talking about excommunication proves that you know what its real purpose is. There is no such thing as a Roman Catholic Nazi. There are those who claim to be Roman Catholic and claim to be Nazis but they are not Roman Catholic, excommunicated by their actions. June 1932: Wilhelm Senn was suspended from his position for joining the National Socialist Party and claimed Hitler was "instrument of divine providence" In spring 1936, Pius issued an encyclical against Nazism and Communism. He ordered the following to be read from all German pulpits: . . . only superficial minds can fall into the error of speaking of a national God, a national religion, or make the attempt to imprison, with the frontiers of a single people, God, the Creator of the world. Hitler banned its reading. Catholic schools were attacke,d Church property was confiscated and Church leaders were harassed. 1000 lesser priests were confined in Dachau. Hitler ordered that no priests from higher ranks were to be arrested because he wanted no Catholic martyrs. After the government of Italy issued the Aryan Manifesto, the Pope urged all Italian Catholics to fight and reject Italy’s racial policies. Pius XI died in 1939 and was replaced by Pius XII. In fear for persecution against Catholics, he attempted to find peace between teh Church and Germany to preserve the lives of Catholics in Germany and areas being attacked. Because of a fear for the people under him, Pius was criticized for his neutrality. With scriptural support, however, he encouraged all Catholics to do their civic duty and to submit to the authority of their governments. In 1942, the Pope pleaded with the Slovakian government that 52 thousand Jews who were being deported to camps not be and remain in their homes. It worked. In 1943, Nazis were arresting the 8 thousand Jews in Rome. Pius paid off the randsom to save those who the randsom was applicable. The PCA was established which worked to help prisoners, deportees, refugees, and oppressed. Reallocation of around 2000 Jews occurred, sending them to the US. The PCA put out 11 million missing persons inquiries and because of that, many of them were answered and families were reunited. The pope intervened in Germany’s euthanasia program and it was halted. Scandinavia wasn’t invaded because of his intercession. There are thousands of scholars who argue that Hitler backed down at every papal intervention. Pope Pius XII served with brilliant diplomacy. He earned the respect of the world and it took great courage for him to preserve the Vatican’s traditional neutrality. He had great success within the Church and did well through diplomacy to stop as much as he could and save who he could. He couldn’t fight… he had no army… He also feared that the Vatican City would be destroyed if he publicly denounced Hitler. He did well in preserving Church, tradition, and attempting to dissolve situations via diplomacy while nations solved them by warfare. -Robert – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – It’s certainly questionable whether Pius was pro-Nazi, but there is no doubt he made a lot of accomodations to Hitler that could very well have eased his rise to power by neutering Catholic opposition in Germany. His failure to speak out against not only the Jewish Holocaust, but the mass murder of millions of Catholics throughout Europe is simply inexcusable. He certainly had no problem speaking out against the communists, who posed a far greater threat to the Church than Hitler did. Protecting the Church itself, and not its millions of followers, seems to have been his primary concern. Let’s remember that to this day, the Church somehow still hasn’t gotten around to excommunicating any of the Nazi or fascist leadership. Sean C

Response:

Do you know anything about WWII? Hitler’s primary goal was Poland. It wasn’t only Jews who were killed. 45 million people died as a result of WWII. Of that, 10 million are known to be Catholic. In parts of Poland, entire congregations were rounded up and sent to prison camps. We are talking clergy, parishes, those of religious life. It was Hitler’s goal to germanize Europe, starting with Poland. Since, however, 40% of Germany was Catholic, he did not take as many radical actions against the population . Those who spoke against him were thrown into concentration camps. That is just rationalization, and you know it. It is easier for the Pope to say something that it was for individuals. Maybe Italy, Spain, and Portugal would have done something about their complicity if the Pope had stood up.

Again, this 45 million people died figure arises. Not only Jews died. Those who faught to end the war were killed too. Let’s not foget about those men who bravely faught to end this war… It is far more likely that the Catholic Church wasn’t all that upset about the loss of the Jews. After all, they had worked on the problem for hundreds of years without a "final solution".

I am not even really going to say anything about this. The Catholic Church post Vatican II has reformed to hold dear to her heart the santity of life. It was a WAR. The Roman Catholic Church does NOT have an ARMY. Political wars, despite there being rooted in religious-genocide, must be battled with nations that have armies. You are rationalizing answers for an historical event based on your modern-day attitudes. You are counting numbers… this is wrong. The people who were killed were not numbers! You argue "only a handful of Catholics were killed… millions of Jews were killed" Numbers: 2800 clergymen were housed at Dachau. Of them, 2500 were Catholic. 1034 died in the camp. In 1940, 800 priests died in Buchenwald, 1200 in 1942, 3000 in 1943. That was just in Buchenwald. This figure doesn’t include the clergy or nuns who were shot, beheaded, or tortued to death in jails all over Europe. In France in 1944, Gestapo arrested 170 priests, 123 who were shot or beheaded before camp. 780 priests died of exhaustion at Mauthausen, 300 at Sachsenhausen, and were hundreds of other camps unknown. 2,770 were counted to have died in transit to camps. The Pope not only had to answer the please from Jews, but to take care of his companions. He is the bishop of the Roman Catholic Church, he has to take care of his clergy. Hitler: "The heaviest blow to humanity was the coming of Christianity. Bolshevism is Christianity’s illegitimate child. Borh are inventions of Jews." In 1942, the Pope told a priest, Fr. Dezza "they want to destroy the Church and crush it as a toad… there will be no place for the Pope in the new Europe, they say that I am going to America, I have no fear and I shall remain here." Seminaries were closed, Churches burnt to the ground. newspapers closed and other associations closed down. The Pope was facing two battles: for the survival of the Jews and for the survival of the Church. In Poland, 3 MILLION Catholics went to death along with 3 million Jews. This is in addition to the millions murdered by the Soviets. Any action against Hitler by the Catholic Church leaders provoked more executions of Jews and catholics. 3 million from Poland… I listed around 5000 clergy members for you. These aren’t small numbers anymore… and these are in addition to all of the Catholic soldiers who died, Christian soldiers who died, Jewish soldiers who died. These weren’t people who were fighting to preserve their own religion. These were people fighting to preserve life! Get your facts straight before you speak. Don’t give people numbers. People die in wars. these people were individuals just like you and me. They weren’t numbers and the life of one of them is just as precious as the life of all of them. -Robert

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Ever notice how the Catholic culties get real quiet when the truth of the church and their response to the holocaust comes up? I hate to say it — being an early escapee from the Catholic church — but it’s all a bunch of bullshit. The Catholic church was (and remains) psychotically anti-Communist, due almost entirely to the fact that Communist Russia was an officially atheistic state. But, they were no more "pro-Nazi" than any other Christian church on the European continent, or religious & secular groups here in the United States.

In fairness, he didn’t say the Church was pro-Nazi, but criticized the Church for its response to the Holocaust. There is little doubt on any side of the debate that Pius XII failed to speak out aginst the Holocaust. Whether his sins were those of ommission or commission is where the debate really centers. They were (and remain) wildly supportive of any right-wing government, providing that said government demonstrates sufficient reverence for Christianity, and the Catholic church in particular. Fascist Spain? Yes. Definitely. Nazi Germany? No. Nothing the least bit exceptional, nothing to set them apart from other religious & secular organizations in the west.

It’s certainly questionable whether Pius was pro-Nazi, but there is no doubt he made a lot of accomodations to Hitler that could very well have eased his rise to power by neutering Catholic opposition in Germany. His failure to speak out against not only the Jewish Holocaust, but the mass murder of millions of Catholics throughout Europe is simply inexcusable. He certainly had no problem speaking out against the communists, who posed a far greater threat to the Church than Hitler did. Protecting the Church itself, and not its millions of followers, seems to have been his primary concern. Let’s remember that to this day, the Church somehow still hasn’t gotten around to excommunicating any of the Nazi or fascist leadership. Sean C

Response:

The President of the United States didn’t say anything. And, unlike the Pope, he had something other than a few alter boys to throw at the concentration camps. As a matter of fact, the only allied bombings of concentration camps targeted the industry employing the prisoners as slave labor, and killed many of those prisoners.

Response:

Ever notice how the Catholic culties get real quiet when the truth of the church and their response to the holocaust comes up?

Well, I don’t know what a cultie is, but I’m a traditionalist Catholic and I’ve never been quiet about it. The church has a lamentable history of antisemitism and also a dismal record of silence during the Shoah – just like the UK and US nations. Some Catholics did try to save and protect Jews, including some Vatican officials. Others gave Red Cross passports to some of the perpetrators. IMHO, we should all be doing penance for these wrongs, and that must begin with apology and reconciliation. But let’s not forget that most other large institutions – eg the Lutheran church and most nation-states – have a similarly spotty record. Like the way the US rounded up some war-criminals and recruited some others into its secret service. But I assume this record isn’t going to make you turn in your passport. I feel just the same. Let’s not forget either that neither the Us nor the Church perpetrated the shoah. It was actually the Nazis. We shoudl feel soem guilt but we shouldn’t be confused. — Jane Lumley

Response:

Ever notice how the Catholic culties get real quiet when the truth of the church and their response to the holocaust comes up?

I hate to say it — being an early escapee from the Catholic church — but it’s all a bunch of bullshit. The Catholic church was (and remains) psychotically anti-Communist, due almost entirely to the fact that Communist Russia was an officially atheistic state. But, they were no more "pro-Nazi" than any other Christian church on the European continent, or religious & secular groups here in the United States. They were (and remain) wildly supportive of any right-wing government, providing that said government demonstrates sufficient reverence for Christianity, and the Catholic church in particular. Fascist Spain? Yes. Definitely. Nazi Germany? No. Nothing the least bit exceptional, nothing to set them apart from other religious & secular organizations in the west.

Response:

Ever notice how the Catholic culties get real quiet when the truth of the church and their response to the holocaust comes up?

Yup. That’s because the catholics were all for it, or did not care one bit. A good film was made about it : http://us.imdb.com/title/tt0280653/ — Olrik aa #1981 Qualified SMASH member EAC Chief Food Inspector, Bacon Division

Response:

You point to a handful of Catholics in the camps as if that means anything in the scheme of what went on. Maybe if the Pope had said something those millions of Polish and Ukrainian Catholics wouldn’t gone along with the slaughter of the Jews in Poland. Though Catholic men should stand up and say something against the actions of racism and genocide, it is hard for a leader, especially the Pope, to make such a decision when the hatred is harbored in his country.

That is just rationalization, and you know it. It is easier for the Pope to say something that it was for individuals. Maybe Italy, Spain, and Portugal would have done something about their complicity if the Pope had stood up. The Pope says one thing and the ENTIRE Church is labeled as being an enemy to the cause of the regime and not only Jews but Catholics are slaughtered as well because of the outcry of a leader.

Yawn. That is so feeble I’m surprised you bring it up. At least half of Europe was Catholic – not at all in the same boat as the Jews. If I were a lead what would I do? Would I speak up? Maybe.. would I think about it in fear for the lives of all those who follow my leadership? Yes.

It is far more likely that the Catholic Church wasn’t all that upset about the loss of the Jews. After all, they had worked on the problem for hundreds of years without a "final solution". Ever notice how the Catholic culties get real quiet when the truth of the church and their response to the holocaust comes up? — Bush is not my President.

– Bush is not my President.

Response:

Ever notice how the Catholic culties get real quiet when the truth of the church and their response to the holocaust comes up? — Bush is not my President.

Response:

Yes… the truth that Catholics as well as Jews were killed in camps as Poland was invaded… the fact that Hitler was excommunicated from the Roman Catholic Church by his actions… the fact that millions of Catholics went to war against Germany, Italy, and Japan… Though Catholic men should stand up and say something against the actions of racism and genocide, it is hard for a leader, especially the Pope, to make such a decision when the hatred is harbored in his country. The Pope says one thing and the ENTIRE Church is labeled as being an enemy to the cause of the regime and not only Jews but Catholics are slaughtered as well because of the outcry of a leader. If I were a lead what would I do? Would I speak up? Maybe.. would I think about it in fear for the lives of all those who follow my leadership? Yes. -Robert

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Ever notice how the Catholic culties get real quiet when the truth of the church and their response to the holocaust comes up? — Bush is not my President.

Response:

Word Freedom

admin — Wed, 20 Oct 2004 00:00:00 +0000

Question:

I’m not very athletic. I am semi-intelligent.

Response:

Emanations. With this word, I annoy a nearby priest.

Response:

A body builder can’t truly fast. Fasting might cleanse the body and induce a spiritual state of mind. As most people are blinded by logic, this piece of information is useless to them and must sometimes be kept silent. Logic might be a spiritual stain of some sort, like a curse. It might not go away. For the better, I am less logical than most people, including most of my family. Roman Catholic fanatics are not common and my bloodline is blessed. Other things I am might not be apparent. Free will. Penetration.

Response:

To the few or none: They sometimes dump trash over there in aircraft without authorization. Their police are sometimes controlled by Americans. Anathema.

Response:

There are things I would kill for and one of them is maintaining my religion. Some white people might wrongly believe I can’t be a good Roman Catholic because I am not of European origin. Such an assumption has a white supremist nature. I might kill a priest or bishop too, if I had to and if I could. In a pit of immorality like America, it might sometimes be necessary.

Response:

Mobilehead > Egghead > Meathead Proper religion is not always based on the word or the mind. A silent spirit can carry weight with God, but regulating the word is wrong. Regulating relationships is also wrong.

Response:

I have in interest in bceoming a priest, but might never become one. It is not wrong to keep trying. It might be more wrong to play one when you are not truly one, such as wearing the regalia without proper ordination. In the real world, flukes of ordination might happen, but are not always easy to verfiy. The necessity might arise because of the sins of man, both in the past and in the present. Not all sins are violent.

Response:

I haven’t lost the cause or his support yet. As a statesman, he might receive pressures from ecclesiastical and non-ecclesiastical figures with whom he does not necessarily agree. Some of them, including theologians and women, might even be annoying. His word: Irritating.

Response:

JOHN’S TOUCH

Response:

John is a small elderly man and I would defend him if someone gave him a hard time. I suspect he is a French mutt, but he knows that better than I do.

Response:

Why does the nearby priest have needles? Why is there a knife in my bedroom? Perhaps we should ask the Protected Sniper.

Response:

John looked almost like a homeless person, but I had a feeling he was more than he seemed.

Response:

Hispanics vs. Italians

Response:

Lisa Karate doesn’t want to be in the psyche ward. Have you asked her where she wants to go?

Response:

Word errors are not that big of a deal. Things in the world where error count are often not truly necessary and sometimes invasive.

Response:

CHILD RAPISTS BANKRUPT 2nd DIOCESE

admin — Mon, 27 Sep 2004 00:00:00 +0000

Question:

exactly. That has always been the Catholic response. If they can prove others do it, then it’s ok for them to do it. They did it with the millions they killed in the dark ages, they do it with the children they rape as well. — …Nicholas www.RemnantofGod.org

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – so what’s this trying to tell us….that the problem is no big deal since everyone is doing it? message Ok, looking at the Anglican church and it’s doctrines, I see Roman Catholicism. If it walks like a duck, it will be sued like one. — …Nicholas www.RemnantofGod.org message CHILD RAPISTS BANKRUPT 2nd DIOCESE For all those that claim "it’s not just Catholic priests raping young boys…" Do you see any OTHER denominations filing for bankruptcy because of all their lawsuits regarding same?? Anglican Church in Canada. http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2000/105/13.0.html check out www.reformation.com

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Ok, looking at the Anglican church and it’s doctrines, I see Roman Catholicism. If it walks like a duck, it will be sued like one. — …Nicholas www.RemnantofGod.org message CHILD RAPISTS BANKRUPT 2nd DIOCESE For all those that claim "it’s not just Catholic priests raping young boys…" Do you see any OTHER denominations filing for bankruptcy because of all their lawsuits regarding same?? Anglican Church in Canada. http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2000/105/13.0.html

check out www.reformation.com

Response:

so what’s this trying to tell us….that the problem is no big deal since everyone is doing it?

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – message Ok, looking at the Anglican church and it’s doctrines, I see Roman Catholicism. If it walks like a duck, it will be sued like one. — …Nicholas www.RemnantofGod.org message CHILD RAPISTS BANKRUPT 2nd DIOCESE For all those that claim "it’s not just Catholic priests raping young boys…" Do you see any OTHER denominations filing for bankruptcy because of all their lawsuits regarding same?? Anglican Church in Canada. http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2000/105/13.0.html check out www.reformation.com

Response:

Anglican Church in Canada. http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2000/105/13.0.html

Response:

Ok, looking at the Anglican church and it’s doctrines, I see Roman Catholicism. If it walks like a duck, it will be sued like one. — …Nicholas www.RemnantofGod.org

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – message CHILD RAPISTS BANKRUPT 2nd DIOCESE For all those that claim "it’s not just Catholic priests raping young boys…" Do you see any OTHER denominations filing for bankruptcy because of all their lawsuits regarding same?? Anglican Church in Canada. http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2000/105/13.0.html

Response:

CHILD RAPISTS BANKRUPT 2nd DIOCESE For all those that claim "it’s not just Catholic priests raping young boys…" Do you see any OTHER denominations filing for bankruptcy because of all their lawsuits regarding same?? 2nd U.S. Diocese Files for Bankruptcy Protection TUCSON, Arizona, SEPT. 20, 2004 (Zenit.org).- The Diocese of Tucson filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy reorganization in an attempt to protect its assets from judgments and settlements stemming from sexual misconduct by some of its priests. The diocese becomes the second Catholic diocese in the nation, after Portland, Oregon, to file for reorganization in the face of millions of dollars in claims alleging sexual misconduct by priests. Tucson Bishop Gerald Kicanas said reorganization will provide the diocese a way to reorganize its debt and protect its assets, the Tucson Citizen newspaper reported. A bankruptcy judge will appoint someone to oversee a diocese reorganization plan. For TONS of proof it IS a Roman Catholic Sodomite problem, see this… http://www.remnantofgod.org/rccsex.htm — …Nicholas www.RemnantofGod.org

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – CHILD RAPISTS BANKRUPT 2nd DIOCESE For all those that claim "it’s not just Catholic priests raping young boys…" Do you see any OTHER denominations filing for bankruptcy because of all their lawsuits regarding same?? 2nd U.S. Diocese Files for Bankruptcy Protection TUCSON, Arizona, SEPT. 20, 2004 (Zenit.org).- The Diocese of Tucson filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy reorganization in an attempt to protect its assets from judgments and settlements stemming from sexual misconduct by some of its priests. The diocese becomes the second Catholic diocese in the nation, after Portland, Oregon, to file for reorganization in the face of millions of dollars in claims alleging sexual misconduct by priests. Tucson Bishop Gerald Kicanas said reorganization will provide the diocese a way to reorganize its debt and protect its assets, the Tucson Citizen newspaper reported. A bankruptcy judge will appoint someone to oversee a diocese reorganization plan. For TONS of proof it IS a Roman Catholic Sodomite problem, see this… http://www.remnantofgod.org/rccsex.htm — …Nicholas www.RemnantofGod.org

Not neccesarily bankrupt, but… From http://www.reformation.com/ WORCESTER, MA. A former pastor Andrew J. Bierkan, 54, at the First Congregational Church of Sutton who now heads a church in Ohio has been indicted here on charges of unnatural rape of a child and posing a child in a state of nudity. He is now pastor of St. Paul United Church of Christ in Cincinnati, according to Worcester District Attorney John J. Conte. (Worcester Telegram & Gazette, August 13, 2003) Ex-Sutton pastor charged with rape of girl from church MINNEAPOLIS, MN-An organization calling itself SNAP (Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests) will file a lawsuit against an Episcopal priest who abused a California youngster years ago, and still serves in a parish today. David Clohessy, 46, a national director of SNAP told VIRTUOSITY that he could not name the priest pending the suit, but would release the name shortly. Clohessy did express one serious concern. "I fear that some 400 ex-Roman Catholic priests will surface in other denominations including the Episcopal Church." (Aug. 2, 2003) Eddie Thomas, pastor of St. Luke Baptist Church in Ringgold, LA., is arrested and charged with indecent behavior with a juvenile, aggravated incest and pornography involving a juvenile. (the Shreveport Times, July 17, 2003) Police seize videotape alleged to show sex with child South Austrailia, AUS. A South Australian police task force into child sex abuse within the Anglican Church had identified 217 victims and 48 possible offenders, police said today. However the number of victims could rise to more than 400 as investigations continued, Police Commissioner Mal Hyde said. Mr Hyde today likened the scale of police investigations into child sex abuse to those for the infamous Snowtown bodies-in-the-barrels murders in 1999. (The Age, July 16 2003) Major sex abuse uncovered in Anglican Church Vicar Rev Robin Everett of Castle Donnington, Leics, is convicted of indecently assaulting two young girls. (UK Telegraph, June 7, 2003) Vicar faces prison for sex assaults Lake Wales, FL. The pastor at the Church of the Nazarene has been charged with sexually assaulting a male 17-year-old youth leader three times in 2001. The Rev. Gene Francis, 52, of Lake Wales, was arrested Tuesday and charged with unlawful sexual activity with a minor. (Sarasota Herald-Tribune, June 4, 2003) Lake Wales minister arrested in sexual assault case Tuscon, AZ. The Rev. David Valencia, 47, assistant pastor of a Pentecostal church is expected in court Wednesday on rape charges issued by Pennsylvania authorities. In Pennsylvania, Valencia was an assistant pastor at Christ Church at Grove Farm, an interdenominational church that uses Anglican liturgy. The pastor of Christ Church, the Rev. John Guest, told the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette that Valencia was dismissed in late 2001 because he was found to have pornography on an office computer after he was warned about a similar incident months earlier. (Tucson Citizen, May 31, 2003) Rev. David Valencia allegedly had sex with a 17-year-old girl he was counseling PORTLAND, OR. Church volunteer pleaded innocent to 26 counts of rape, sodomy and sex abuse. Derrick Mayberry was indicted by a grand jury on Tuesday and entered the plea on Wednesday. Mayberry, 23, was arrested May 15 on accusations of raping two teenage girls he met while volunteering at the New Beginnings Christian Center in northeast Portland. The victims were 13 and 15 years old. (KOIN TV, May 29, 2003) Church Worker, Coach Enters Plea In Sex Abuse Case Church volunteer, coach faces sex abuse charges Queensland, AUS. In the small town of Seymour, townspeople are shocked to learn that the late Anglican Fr. Sapsford molested dozens of alter boys while he was married with children, and after his serial molestation at another church was revealed in 1996. There are allegations by the parents of the victim boys that the Archbishop covered up the original allegations. The church is not compensating victims while they consult with legal counsel. Anglican Father Walliker says he is not shocked as he has seen this before in the Anglican Church. (ABC online, May 8, 2003) Cover-up left paedophile to prey on Vic altar boys NEWARK, N.J. A convicted sex offender who was named pastor of a city church several weeks ago has been removed from the post. Shiloh Baptist Church leaders had hired the Rev. Chavalis T. Williams in mid-March, even though they knew he had pleaded guilty in Florida to charges of child abuse and using children in a sexual performance. (Newsday, May 7, 2003) Convicted sex offender removed as pastor of Newark church Unidentified clergyman in Norway defends himself by accusing boys of pestering him to provide pornography to them and pulling their pants down for him. Criminal defendants in Norway are not identified by name. (Nordlys, April 30, 2003) Clergyman says boredom led him to child porn An associate pastor of a San Fernando Valley chapel was sentenced to 32 months in prison on Tuesday for failing to register as a sex offender. Ilger, a former second-grade teacher, was convicted in 1988 of molesting four students in his San Luis Obispo classroom. After being released from jail, Ilger and his family moved to Los Angeles, where he took a position with Hope Chapel of the Valley in Canoga Park. "We’ve lived and learned a painful lesson," the Rev. Jeff Fischer of Hope Chapel said outside court. Fischer has said he and about 30 church elders knew that Ilger had molested young girls before he was hired. Sentencing (Associated Press, April 3, 2003) Marty A. Hynes, 33, is charged with eight counts of criminal sexual contact of a minor, three counts of criminal sexual penetration of a minor and one count of attempted criminal sexual contact of a minor. Hynes was a youth pastor at the First Assembly of God church when the alleged incidents occurred, between July and December 2001. (Las Cruces Sun-News, March 24, 2003) Trial of former youth pastor begins Milpitas, CA. A secretary to a LDS Bishop has admitted to sexually molesting four children, and will be sentenced to 14 years in prison. Craig Allen Harward, 54, pleaded guilty Monday to three counts of lewd and lascivious acts on children under the age of 14, and no contest to a fourth count of the same charge, Four of the case with the most convincing evidence involved four boys — two of whom were 10, one 11 and another 13 years old at the time they were molested. (SAan Fransisco Chronicle, March 12, 2003) Child molester pleads guilty Visalia, CA — A 38-year-old Visalia man who was a leader in a local Jehovah’s Witness congregation may face up to 16 years in prison on charges of sexually molesting a 12-year-old congregation member. Louis Anguiano served until last year as an elder at the Kingdom Hall of Jehovah’s Witnesses at 5310 Caldwell Ave. He is accused of continuous sexual abuse, over a two-year period, of a girl … read more »

Response:

Failure of Catholic Celibacy

admin — Fri, 10 Sep 2004 00:00:00 +0000

Question:

Article by D. Hunt The history of celibacy makes for reading so black. . A large part [of it] is the story of the degradation of women. . Ivo of Chartres (1040-1115) tells of whole convent with inmates who were nuns only in name . [but] were really prostitutes." –Peter de Rosa, Vicars of Christ "The recent disclosures of widespread sexual misconduct on the part of certain members of the Roman Catholic clergy come as no surprise to most of us who were once priests or nuns." –Ex-nun Patrici Nolan Savas in USA Today Let there be no understanding: We are not suggesting that Catholic popes, priests, and nuns are inherently more prone to promiscuity than the rest of mankind. Our hearts are all the same. Many of these tragic individuals no doubt began with high moral and spiritual aspirations and in that spirit set out upon what they sincerely intended to be a life of purity and devotion to Christ. It was the system of hierarchical privilege, power, and authority over the laity which perverted and destroyed them. That system, as we have seen, gathered momentum through the centuries by the lust and greed of popes whose natural propensity for evil (innate in us all) found occasion through the unusual opportunities afforded by their office. To enhance their power they issued a host of false documents which purported to be the writings of early Church Fathers and decrees of early synods. One self-serving theme of these forgeries was the claim that the popes had inherited "innocence and sanctity from Peter" and could not be judged by any man. Von Dollinger writes: "A saying ascribed to Constantine, at the Council of Nice, in a legend recorded by Rufinus, was amplified till it was fashioned into a perfect mine of high-flying pretensions. Constantine, according to this fable, when the written accusations of the bishops against each other were laid before him, burned them, saying … that the bishops were gods, and no man could dare to judge them" (J.H. Ignaz von Dollinger, The Pope and the Council, London, 1869, pp. 89-91). If one is on the level of the gods, what privileges could not one claim? Gods are above the law. No wonder, then, that the popes began to declare openly that they had power over kings and kingdoms and all persons, and power to behave like tyrants. The added pretense of infallibility only made matters worse. Each priest and nun, by association, shares (though to a lesser extent) this same corrupting absolutism and elevation above laypersons. Add to this pretended Godlike authority the unnatural rule of celibacy (an intolerable burden which only a small minority of persons could possibly bear) and the stage is set for all manner of evil. A sincere Catholic historian writes: "The fact is that priestly celibacy had hardly ever worked. In the view of some historians, it has probably done more harm to morals than any other institution in the West, including prostitution. … "The proof of the harm done by celibacy comes not from bigoted anti-Catholic sources; on the contrary, it includes papal and conciliar documents and letters of reforming saints. They all point one direction: far from being a candle in a naughty world, priestly celibacy has been more often tha not a stain on the name of Christianity" (Peter de Rosa, Vicars of Christ: The Dark Side of the Papacy, Crown Publishers, 1988, pp. 395-96). CELIBACY’S ROOTS AND FRUITS One must understand that mandatory celibacy is not taught in the Bible, nor was it practiced by the apostles. This teaching developed as an integral part of the evolving papal system and gradually became essential to it. The concern was not morality, for celibacy proved to be a veritable cornucopia of evil. In fact, the rule of celibacy was not the prohibition of sex but of marriage. Pope Alexander II (1061-73), for example, refused to discipline a priest who had committed adultery with his father’s second wife because he hadn’t committed the sin of matrimony. That was the great evil which had to be eliminated for the priesthood to be totally devoted to the Church. All down through history not only priests and prelates but popes as well had their mistresses and visited prostitutes. Many were homosexuals. No member of the clergy was ever excommunicated for having sex, but thousands have been put out of the priesthood for the scandal of getting married. Why then the strict insistence upon celibacy, even to the present day, if it really doesn’t mean abstinence from sex? It is because the rule of celibacy has a very practical and lucrative result for the Church: It leaves priests and especially bishops and popes without families to whom to bequeath property and thereby impoverish the Church. The clergy must have no heirs. Pope Gregory VII, bemoaning the difficulty in stamping out marriage among priests, declared: "The Church cannot escape from the clutches of the laity unless priests first escape from the clutches of their wives." Here is another vital reason for celibacy: to create a priesthood without the encumbrance (and loving loyalties) of wives and children. Thus fornication and adultery, though forbidden in theory, were preferable to a marriage relationship. Nineteenth-century historian R.W. Thompson explains: "It was considered absolutely necessary to the perfect working of the papal system that there should organize a compact body of ecclesiastics, destitute of all those generous sympathies which grow alone out of the family relation, that they might be the better fitted to do the work of the popes." (R.W. Thompson, The Papacy and the Civil Power, New York, 1876, p.443). Though married men in those early days were allowed to enter the priesthood, they were required to live celibate lives. Pope Leo I (440-61) decreed that married clergy were to treat their wives "as sisters." Few if any Catholics realize that as late as the reign of Pope Gregory VII (1073-85) it was accepted for priests to be married and supposedly live in celibacy with their wives. Such a requirement was both unnatural and unrealistic. Who could keep such a rule? All over Italy the clerics openly had largely families and no discipline was enacted against them. After all, many of the popes had large families as well and sometime made no secret of it. De Rosa comments: "This theological confusion in an age of depravity led the clergy, in fifth-century Rome in particular, to become a byword for everything that was gross and perverted. …When Pope Sixtus III (432-40 was put on trial for seducing a nun, he ably defended himself by quoting Christ’s words, `Let him who is without fault among you throw the first stone.’ "…roving monks were proving to be a social menace … there … were long periods when many monasteries were nothing but houses of ill repute. … The second Council of Tours in the year 567 … publicly admitted there was hardly a cleric anywhere without his wife or mistress" (De Rosa, op. cit., pp. 402-03). A SYSTEM MADE FOR PROSTITUTION For centuries the priesthood was largely hereditary. Most priests were the sons of other priests and bishops. More than one pope was the illegitimate son of a previous and supposedly celibate pope. For example, Pope Sylverius (536-7) was fathered by Pope Hormisdas (514-23), and John XI (931-5) by Sergius III (904-11) of his favorite mistress, Marozia, to whom we referred earlier. Among the other bastards who ruled the Church were Popes Boniface I (41822), Gelasius (492-6), Agapitus (535-6), and Theodore (642-9). There were more. Adrian IV (1154-9) was the son of a priest. No wonder Pope Pius II (1458-64) said Rome was "the only city run by bastards." Pius himself admitted to fathering at least two illegitimate children, by different women, one of them married at the time. The rule of celibacy literal created prostitutes, making Rome the "Mother of Harlots," as the apostle John foresaw. In his fiery sermons, Savonarola of Florence, Italy (soon to be martyred), called Rome "a harlot ready to sell her favors for coin" (Will Durant, The Story of Civilization, Simon and Schuster, 1950, vol. VI, p. 18) and accused the priests of bringing "spiritual death upon all … their piety consists in spending their nights with harlots." He cried, "one thousand, ten thousand, fourteen thousand harlots are few for Rome, for there both men and women are made harlots" (Ibid., vol. V, pp. 155-56). Pope Alexander VI threatened to "lay an interdict upon Florence" if it did not silence Savonarola. The city rulers obeyed for fear that as a result of the interdict all "the Florentine merchants in Rome would be thrown into jail" (Ibid., pp. 157-58). The pope wanted Savonarola brought to Rome for trial as a heretic, but the Signory of Florence wanted to execute him themselves. After signing confessions that had been wrung out of them by the cruelest of torture, Savonarola and two comrade friars were hanged and burned to ashes (Ibid., pp. 159-60). Yet this man who preached against the Church leaders’ immorality and was slain by Roman Catholics is now celebrated by the Vatican as "a giant of our faith, martyred May 23, 1498" (Inside the Vatican, April 1994, p. 55 under the heading "23 May"). What revision of history! Visiting Germany in the eighth century, St. Boniface found that none of the clergy honored their vows of celibacy. He wrote to Pope Zachary (741-52): "Young men who spent their youth in rape and adultery were rising in the ranks of the clergy. They were spending their nights in bed with four or five women, then getting up in the morning … to celebrate mass." Bishop Rathurio complained that if he excommunicated unchaste priests "there would be none left to administer the sacraments, except boys. If he excluded bastards, as canon law demanded, not even boys [would be left]" (De Rosa, op. cit., pp. 404-05). Even idealists became unprincipled rogues because the priesthood was one of the surest and fastest ways to wealth and power and afforded unique opportunities for the most … read more »

Response:

Bull. Mother Theresa and her sisters were and are celibates who continue to attract idealists to a lifetime of service and love. What perverts and destroys clerical commitment is burnout and a secular society that patronizes and condemns their sacrifice. The sexual sins of the clergy and the celibates are no worse than the sexual sins of our society; the sexual revolution has tarred ALL our churches. How many divorced and remarried clergy exist in churches that allow married clergy? Blessing same-sex "marriages" isn’t an example of loosening traditional sexual morality? We tolerate children having sex with each other (ever hear of high school condom programs?); we tolerate gay recruiting on campus (ever hear of gay high school clubs?). And they we wonder why our young people, including young priests, are screwed up sexually? It’s not celibacy. Traditional marriage is equally scoffed at. Sexual abuse of children comes from all parts of adult society. It’s society’s rampant sexual immorality that’s the cause. All the other "answers" are a cop-out.

Response:

Oh no. Papist filth is always Papist filth.

Response:

Many of these tragic individuals no doubt began with high moral and spiritual aspirations and in that spirit set out upon what they sincerely intended to be a life of purity and devotion to Christ. It was the system of hierarchical privilege, power, and authority over the laity which perverted and destroyed them. Bull. Mother Theresa and her sisters were and are celibates who continue to attract idealists to a lifetime of service and love. What perverts and destroys clerical commitment is burnout and a secular society that patronizes and condemns their sacrifice.

Nuns. Ain’t got none, don’t want none, never will git none. The sexual sins of the clergy and the celibates are no worse than the sexual sins of our society;

Except that not only are they sinners but hypocrites as well. Jesus hated hypocrisy, so yes, the clergy resides on the bottom of the barrel. the sexual revolution has tarred ALL our churches.

Excuses, excuses! How many divorced and remarried clergy exist in churches that allow married clergy?

Oddly enough, the funnymentalists and Baptists seem to have higher divorce rates than the general population. Blessing same-sex "marriages" isn’t an example of loosening traditional sexual morality?

If a same sex marriage is monogamous, and an opposite sex marriage is not, which one is the most "moral"? We tolerate children having sex with each other (ever hear of high school condom programs?); we tolerate gay recruiting on campus (ever hear of gay high school clubs?). And they we wonder why our young people, including young priests, are screwed up sexually?

Who says our young people are screwed up sexually? It’s all a matter of point of view. They’d consider YOU screwed up! It’s not celibacy. Traditional marriage is equally scoffed at. Sexual abuse of children comes from all parts of adult society. It’s society’s rampant sexual immorality that’s the cause. All the other "answers" are a cop-out.

Yeah right. You blame the pedophilia scandals in your pathetic, ridiculous cult – on society! Talk about copping out! What hypocrisy! — Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Many of these tragic individuals no doubt began with high moral and spiritual aspirations and in that spirit set out upon what they sincerely intended to be a life of purity and devotion to Christ. It was the system of hierarchical privilege, power, and authority over the laity which perverted and destroyed them. Bull. Mother Theresa and her sisters were and are celibates who continue to attract idealists to a lifetime of service and love. What perverts and destroys clerical commitment is burnout and a secular society that patronizes and condemns their sacrifice. Nuns. Ain’t got none, don’t want none, never will git none. The sexual sins of the clergy and the celibates are no worse than the sexual sins of our society; Except that not only are they sinners but hypocrites as well. Jesus hated hypocrisy, so yes, the clergy resides on the bottom of the barrel. the sexual revolution has tarred ALL our churches. Excuses, excuses! How many divorced and remarried clergy exist in churches that allow married clergy? Oddly enough, the funnymentalists and Baptists seem to have higher divorce rates than the general population. Blessing same-sex "marriages" isn’t an example of loosening traditional sexual morality? If a same sex marriage is monogamous, and an opposite sex marriage is not, which one is the most "moral"? We tolerate children having sex with each other (ever hear of high school condom programs?); we tolerate gay recruiting on campus (ever hear of gay high school clubs?). And they we wonder why our young people, including young priests, are screwed up sexually? Who says our young people are screwed up sexually? It’s all a matter of point of view. They’d consider YOU screwed up! It’s not celibacy. Traditional marriage is equally scoffed at. Sexual abuse of children comes from all parts of adult society. It’s society’s rampant sexual immorality that’s the cause. All the other "answers" are a cop-out. Yeah right. You blame the pedophilia scandals in your pathetic, ridiculous cult – on society! Talk about copping out! What hypocrisy!

This is from the One, Holy, Apostolic Church, beyond which there can be no salvation. A light set on a hill. The salt of the earth.

Response:

Church Says: Kid, No Communion

admin — Fri, 20 Aug 2004 00:00:00 +0000

Question:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Why not just break off a tiny piece of a Host? (as in, 1/20th of a regular host) You receive the whole Christ no matter what size of consecrated Host. I seriously doubt there would be much ill effect there. The article never mentions her level of sensitivity. Eating a hamburger bun and a small particle of a communion Host seem to be two different things. The latter is too small to cause any reaction – it’s not like it’s cyanide or something. I mean, she could have a bottle of water with her, and drink that after she receives – whatever reaction (again, I doubt there would be much at all) would be mitigated. Unfortunately, you are wrong. Although it wouldn’t kill her outright, even a minute amount has an effect on her bowel. OTOH, she had the option of receiving only from the chalice and the family refused that. They are more interested in publicity and grinding their axe than in her receiving Communion.

I would agree with this–notice how many here are showing how "Christian" they are with thier Catholic-hating posts that are using this to their own ends as well. Buny

Response:

Why not just give her the prescious blood? That option was offered but rejected by the family. There is definitely an ulterior motive here.

Wonder what will happen when a celiac victim is also an alcohol intolerant? — Alan "Ferrit" Ferris ()’.’.’() ( (T) ) ( ) . ( ) (")_(")

Response:

Why not just give her the prescious blood? That option was offered but rejected by the family. There is definitely an ulterior motive here. Wonder what will happen when a celiac victim is also an alcohol intolerant?

Then they will be given special ultra low alcohol wine. If we get one who is also allergic to grapes, I guess that person won’t be receiving communion. -Tony — For fairly troll free Catholic discussion, join on the web at: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/romancatholic/ "Or could it confirm that he’s [Joseph Geloso's] a locution short of a dogma?" – Daniel Hoehr

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Why not just give her the prescious blood? That option was offered but rejected by the family. There is definitely an ulterior motive here. Wonder what will happen when a celiac victim is also an alcohol intolerant? Then they will be given special ultra low alcohol wine. If we get one who is also allergic to grapes, I guess that person won’t be receiving communion.

Ultra low will not always bypass an intolerance. — Alan "Ferrit" Ferris ()’.’.’() ( (T) ) ( ) . ( ) (")_(")

Response:

They have probably given this kid cough syrup with more alcohol than cmmunon wine has. they also probably gave her a bigger amount than she would get at cmmunion.

Response:

They have probably given this kid cough syrup with more alcohol than communon wine has. they also probably gave her a bigger amount than she would get at communion.

Response:

Why not just break off a tiny piece of a Host? (as in, 1/20th of a regular host) You receive the whole Christ no matter what size of consecrated Host. If that’s the case, then why not just give the kid a microscopic piece, say a 1/1000, that way you know you’ll be ok. Also, this practice will ensure that less of the flesh of God gets turned into feces.

it doesnt matter the size of the wafer, it is still the body of Christ. A deacon at my church told me he would break up the bigger pieces of the hosts to distribute if he knew he was running out. the mother is just being a total selfish bitch and just wants her way or nothing at all.

Response:

Why not just give her the prescious blood?

Response:

Why not just give her the prescious blood?

That option was offered but rejected by the family. There is definitely an ulterior motive here. Gabby

Response:

The church did not say this–the girl has an option to receive the Eucharist in its other form…her *parents* are the ones who are saying "die or no communion" by refusing to accept the alternative the church offers….this girl is not the only Catholic with celiac disease Buny

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – BRIELLE, N.J. – An 8-year-old girl who suffers from a rare digestive disorder and cannot eat wheat has had her first Holy Communion declared invalid because the wafer contained no wheat, violating Roman Catholic doctrine. Now, Haley Waldman’s mother is pushing the Diocese of Trenton and the Vatican to make an exception, saying the girl’s condition should not exclude her from the sacrament, which commemorates the Last Supper of Jesus Christ before his crucifixion. The mother believes a rice Communion wafer would suffice. "It’s just not a viable option. How does it corrupt the tradition of the Last Supper? It’s just rice versus wheat," said Elizabeth Pelly-Waldman. Church doctrine holds that Communion wafers, like the bread served at the Last Supper, must have at least some unleavened wheat. Church leaders are reluctant to change anything about the sacrament. "This is not an issue to be determined at the diocesan or parish level, but has already been decided for the Roman Catholic Church throughout the world by Vatican authority," Trenton Bishop John M. Smith said in a statement last week. Haley was diagnosed with celiac sprue disease when she was 5. The disorder occurs in people with a genetic intolerance of gluten, a food protein contained in wheat and other grains. When consumed by celiac sufferers, gluten (pronounced GLOO’-ten) damages the lining of the small intestine, blocking nutrient absorption and leading to vitamin deficiencies, bone-thinning and sometimes gastrointestinal cancer. The diocese has told Haley’s mother that the girl can receive a low- gluten wafer, or just drink wine at Communion, but that anything without gluten does not qualify. Pelly-Waldman rejected the offer, saying her child could be harmed by even a small amount of the substance. Haley’s Communion controversy isn’t the first. In 2001, the family of a 5-year-old Massachusetts girl with the disease left the Catholic church after being denied permission to use a rice wafer. Some Catholic churches allow no-gluten hosts, while others do not, said Elaine Monarch, executive director of the Celiac Disease Foundation, a California-based support group for sufferers. "It is an undue hardship on a person who wants to practice their religion and needs to compromise their health to do so," Monarch said. The church has similar rules for Communion wine. For alcoholics, the church allows a substitute for wine under some circumstances, however the drink must still be fermented from grapes and contain some alcohol. Grape juice is not a valid substitute. Haley, a shy, brown-haired tomboy who loves surfing and hates wearing dresses, realizes the consequences of taking a wheat wafer. "I’m on a gluten-free diet because I can’t have wheat. I could die," she said last week. Last year, as the third grader approached Holy Communion age in this Jersey Shore town, her mother told officials at St. Denis Catholic Church in Manasquan that the girl could not have the standard host. After the church’s pastor refused to allow a substitute, a priest at a nearby parish volunteered to offer one, and in May, Haley wore a white Communion dress, and received the sacrament alongside her mother, who had not taken Communion since she herself was diagnosed with the disease. Last month, the diocese told the priest that the church would not validate Haley’s sacrament because of the substitute wafer. "I struggled with telling her that the sacrament did not happen," said Pelly-Waldman. "She lives in a world of rules. She says `Mommy, do we want to break a rule? Are we breaking a rule?’"

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – The diocese has told Haley’s mother that the girl can receive a low- gluten wafer, or just drink wine at Communion, but that anything without gluten does not qualify. Pelly-Waldman rejected the offer, saying her child could be harmed by even a small amount of the substance. Why doesn’t she just take a sip from the chalice. Alcohol won’t hurt her. Canon Law (The law of the Church) Can. 924

YOUR GOD – THE pope

admin — Wed, 04 Aug 2004 00:00:00 +0000

Question:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Hey Nicki…do you believe in the rapture, with Jesus appearing out of the clouds? I don’t converse with name callers. If you were a seeker, or even a Christian, name calling would never grace your lips. KERPLUNK welcome to my KILLFILE I feel badly for you, remnant. Have you ever thought about what it might be like when you reach the end of your life and look back? Then you may finally realize you’ve wasted your time in living the life of an obsessed crackpot, always unable to stop thinking about the Roman Church. Why not wake up out of your trance now? Here, have a cup of coffee!

Poor Nicki must still have nightmares from those months ago when the humiliation I dealt him has left him in this state of denial. I would suggest the twit cleans his own theological backyard out before he starts condemning others religious scores. PeterT

Response:

Hey Nicki…do you believe in the rapture, with Jesus appearing out of the clouds? I don’t converse with name callers. If you were a seeker, or even a Christian, name calling would never grace your lips. KERPLUNK welcome to my KILLFILE

I feel badly for you, remnant. Have you ever thought about what it might be like when you reach the end of your life and look back? Then you may finally realize you’ve wasted your time in living the life of an obsessed crackpot, always unable to stop thinking about the Roman Church. Why not wake up out of your trance now? Here, have a cup of coffee!

Response:

Hey Nicki…do you believe in the rapture, with Jesus appearing out of the clouds? PeterT

I don’t converse with name callers. If you were a seeker, or even a Christian, name calling would never grace your lips. KERPLUNK welcome to my KILLFILE

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – YOUR GOD – THE pope "The Pope is of so great dignity, and so exalted that he is not a mere man, but as it were God. and the vicar of God." -Ferraris Ecclesiastical dictionary "All names which in the Scriptures are applied to Christ, by virtue of which it is established that He is over the church, all the same names are applied to the Pope." – On the Authority of the Councils, book 2, chapter 17 "The Pope and God are the same, so he has all power in Heaven and earth." Pope Pius V, quoted in Barclay, Chapter XXVII, p. 218, "Cities Petrus Bertanous". "…the Pope is as it were God on earth, sole sovereign of the faithful of Christ, chief of kings, having plenitude of power." Lucius Ferraris, in "Prompta Bibliotheca Canonica, Juridica, Moralis, Theologica, Ascetica, Polemica, Rubristica, Historica", Volume V, article on "Papa, Article II", titled "Concerning the extent of Papal dignity, authority, or dominion and infallibility", #1, 5, 13-15, 18, published in Petit-Montrouge (Paris) by J. P. Migne, 1858 edition. "The Pope takes the place of Jesus Christ on earth…by divine right the Pope has supreme and full power in faith, in morals over each and every pastor and his flock. He is the true vicar, the head of the entire church, the father and teacher of all Christians. He is the infallible ruler, the founder of dogmas, the author of and the judge of councils; the universal ruler of truth, the arbiter of the world, the supreme judge of heaven and earth, the judge of all, being judged by no one, God himself on earth." Quoted in the New York Catechism. -These words appeared in the Roman Canon Law: "To believe that our Lord God the Pope has not the power to decree as he is decreed, is to be deemed heretical.-I?i the Gloss "Extravagantes" o.f Pope John XXII Cum inter, Tit. XIV, Cap. IV. Ad Callem Sexti Decretalium, Paris, 1685. -Father A. Pereira says: "It is quite certain that Popes have never approved or rejected this title ‘Lord God the Pope,’ for the passage in the gloss referred to appears in the edition of the Canon Law published in Rome in 1580 by Gregory XIII." -Writers on the Canon Law say, "The Pope and God are the same, so he has all power in heaven and earth."- Barclay Cap. XXVII, p. 218. Cities Petrus Bertrandus, Pius V. – Cardinal Cusa supports his statement. .-Pope Nicholas I declared that "the appellation of God had been confirmed by Constantine on the Pope, who, being God, cannot be judged by man." – Labb IX Dist.: 96 Can. 7, Satis evidentur, Decret Gratian Primer Para. "The pope is of so great dignity and so exalted that he is not a mere man (…) he is as it were God on earth, sole sovereign of the faithful of Christ, chief of kings, having plenitude of power." -Lucius Ferraris,

VATICAN FORCING THE VOTE

admin — Sat, 17 Jul 2004 00:00:00 +0000

Question:

Christian greetings everyone in these last days of life on earth. Praise the Lord we are again being blessed with yet another glimpse into prophetic fulfillment. This is indeed a benefit for the end time Christian. Those of us that keep the Commandments and have the Testimony of Jesus are fully aware of the inevitable arrival of the mark of the beast. Better yet, we are also very much aware of the sealing of the saints by our Heavenly Father. Still, while we await that great and dreadful day we are to maintain the Christian pace and be the watchmen on the walls for those just outside the camp that are about to join our ranks. Sadly, Antichrist is also calling forth his own to ensure his camps come to their number as well. Sadly, that number accurately reflects the number of a man, and his number is 666. Just recently the media, under direct Roman influence, has once again allowed the Vatican to flex it’s ever present political muscles. However, now it is as we see prophecy declares it should be. Once again the Vatican has figured out a way mix state business with church business. Another prophetic fact is, no one seems to notice. It has been going on like this for so long that Rome has finally decided to no longer mince words as well. Sure, they have made political statements from their pulpits for years. I know, I was trapped in Roman Catholicism for 29 years, I’ve seen and heard enough to know. However, now they are shouting boldly that if Catholics vote in certain ways they will be refused certain blessings from their church. Defiant Catholic Voters Shouldn’t Receive Communion, Say 2 Bishops Prelates in Colorado and Oregon Extend Warnings Beyond Politicians COLORADO SPRINGS, Colorado, MAY 14, 2004 (Zenit.org).- Bishop Michael Sheridan says that Catholics should not receive Communion if they vote for politicians who defy Church teaching by supporting abortion, same-sex marriage, euthanasia or stem-cell research. -ZE04051425 The article went on to quote two other Bishops so as to make it appear this is a matter in which ALL bishops agree. That way the American Catholic will be lead to fear he or she is in genuine jeopardy if they vote against their church. Plus, the media flooded televisions, radios and newspapers with hundreds more articles on this very same topic the last few days to further solidify the assumption Rome is up in arms. Below is just one more example in fact. Notice how the article depicts the statement as "one of the strongest stands yet taken by a U.S. Roman Catholic Church leader." Bishop: BAR COMMUNION FOR ABORTION-RIGHTS VOTERS Friday, May 14, 2004 Posted: 9:42 PM EDT (0142 GMT) DENVER, Colorado (Reuters) — A Colorado Bishop, in one of strongest stands yet taken by a U.S. Roman Catholic church leader, says communion should be denied to people who vote for candidates supporting such issues as abortion rights, gay marriage, euthanasia and stem cell research. In my years of research I have seen Rome make many bold statements. But I must agree this one is a bit above the norm. As usual, the church of Rome will use scare tactics to push their agenda. However, this is not a religious action as many are aware, or may assume. This is a political move, nothing more, nothing less. To have these statements made at this time in the "political year" is apparent. Election is but a few months away and the candidate they seek to influence to their end has plenty of time to "recant" or spin the polls to his, as well as Rome’s advantage, regardless if he changes his position on the issues or not. Either way, Rome comes out smelling like a rose, and they know it. The Vatican knew all along about John Kerry’s stand, yet they didn’t make any bold statements until now. Am I for Kerry? Am I for Bush? Actually, I am for neither candidate. Washington hasn’t offered Christian’s a valid candidate in well over a century. Besides, they are BOTH pre-elected to run by the Bilderberg’s anyway. So why bother? The only thing the American people have a votable choice on now is which "flavor" the President will perform his duties. Will he be a Democratic Bilderberg man, or a Republican Bilderberg man? This is truly all we vote on now-a-days. Most understand what Rome is doing is just plain evil. They are FORCING the vote here. They are coercing masses of people to vote as they see fit. They are graphically mixing church and state. Sure they have done this "subtlety" many times before. However, now they see no problem with boldly directing the votes. By the way… If anyone thinks it’s because of abortion, stem cells, or any other excuse these bishops come up with, think again. All one needs to do is skim the history books, or just look back a few years and you will see bishops ADMITTING they knew the church took part in countless abortions as well as other atrocities. The Pope’s "Mea Culpa" of March 12, 2000 confirms that fact rather nicely I think. In fact, how can anyone believe the Vatican is concerned for human lives after admitting to killing over 500 million people during the dark ages? How can anyone believe they’re concerned after helping Hitler kill 6 million more? How can anyone think Rome is apt to embrace any moral issue after the ongoing child molestation scandals, and then the Vatican shutting down the Zero Tolerance option regarding their pedophile priests? Who is blind enough to believe this Vatican, which is right now being sued for their part in the Ustashe prison camp tortures and mass killings is trustworthy? The only ones that are blind to this are those that choose to be blind now. For there is truly that much evidence now that literally makes it impossible for someone not to know these facts. Why else do you think the Pope and all his men lied on March 12, 2000 in the so called mea culpa? They all know now that the people have access to this church’s graphic evil methods at the mere touch of a keyboard thanks to the Internet. All their dirty laundry is out in the open for all to see. That fact alone amazes me how this Vat of sin is still able to stand uncorrected by the "so called" moral authorities of this planet. Irregardless… that day is coming. Time is a funny thing. It eventually leads to a reckoning. Or as they say on the street… what goes around, comes around. My opinion? The only reason Rome is pushing Kerry against a wall before the election is because he no doubt refuses to take part in something that’s monstrously evil. So the Vatican will flexes their muscles so as to break his standoff. Is this why the FIRST Roman Catholic President, John F. Kennedy was assassinated back in 1963? Was it because he refused to do what his pope suggested? My sources, and many others say, YES! So, what’s behind all this? It’s no different than the Y2K crisis, or the so called Anthrax scare. The Vatican is doing as all big governments have always done. They make certain controlling statements, and then they WATCH THE SHEEPLE! Antichrist needs to get the people in line. He needs to know which political moves will work, and which political moves won’t. So, like it has always been done before, they will "test" the masses. This is no different than the "manufactured" election results of the Christian Coalition movement. Rome isn’t blind to the power the "church" has over the people that allow it such power. In fact, the Christian Coalition learned all it’s methods FROM Rome in the first place. I believe I made that fact quite clear in my October 2002 Newsletter entitled, "Christian Coalition to Create Image of Beast!" One more point I would like to make is this. If the Vatican didn’t have this Babylonian adopted wafer god they call the Eucharist, they would have absolutely no power over their people. Cardinal Arinze (The one running the prophesied Roman Ecumenical movement) said the following regarding same. Cardinal Arinze Explains Reasons for Instruction on Eucharist "The Greatest Treasure the Church Has" VATICAN CITY, MAY 26, 2004 (Zenit.org).- Cardinal Francis Arinze minces no words when it comes to the Blessed Sacrament. "The Holy Eucharist is the greatest treasure that the Church has on earth: It is Christ himself," said the prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Sacraments. "Is it any wonder if the Church is careful to protect and guard the celebration of this august mystery?" he asked. ..Q: In the United States, but also in Europe, a great debate erupted over the consistency of Catholic politicians. There are several cases in which politicians declare themselves Catholics and then vote on laws and make statements in clear contrast with Church teachings, as is obvious in the case of the support of laws that facilitate abortion, euthanasia, homosexual marriages, and the spread of anti-life contraceptive schemes. Access by these public personages to the Eucharist creates scandal among the faithful. Does the instruction address this problem? What are the indications furnished on this matter by the dicastery over which you preside? Cardinal Arinze: Moral theology and canon law explain which Catholics may and which may not receive holy Communion… Q: … How much does the Eucharist count in the life of the Church and of the Christian community? Cardinal Arinze: The Eucharistic sacrifice is "the fount and apex of the whole Christian life." The Eucharist is at the center of the life of the Church. The holy Eucharist is the greatest treasure that the Church has on earth: It is Christ himself. -ZE04052624 In this article you see the Cardinal echoing Roman Catholic dogma concerning their idol they call the Christ. They teach their followers that the Eucharist is actually Christ Himself. And yes, we now see this Cardinal echoing the same concerns towards "Political entities" as did the Bishops in those other articles sweeping the nation. This now makes the Catholic believe it truly is an important matter. So they best toe the line, or else! To further illustrate that fact, … read more »

Response:

And Protestant ministers don’t make political statements? How naive! The evening news shows candidates galore speaking at First CME Church or First Unitarian or whatever. You’ll never see that in a Catholic church! If you did, some ACLU type would scream "Church and State! Church and State!" The issue today is whether a professed Catholic can publicly support politicians whose moral teachings are repugnant to morality. In particular, abortion on demand has become so engrained in our national agenda that regularly year after year a million unborn babies are slaughtered by their mothers in the name of "free choice." The bishops are finally showing some cajones by insisting that Catholic politicians either stop calling themselves Catholic or stop making a public show of the Catholicism by taking communion while advocating anti-life policies. This of course only applies to Catholics who attend Catholic worship. Shunning is biblical. 1 Cor 5:11 We are not even as strict at Paul, who wouldn’t even allow them to attend the worship. We merely deny them communion.

Response:

Christian greetings everyone in these last days of life on earth.

Ahhh Nickie……are you feeling poorly? Please get well. Do Adventists have some form of Extreme Unction? BAM

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Sure, they have made political statements from their pulpits for years. I know, I was trapped in Roman Catholicism for 29 years, I’ve seen and heard enough to know. However, now they are shouting boldly that if Catholics vote in certain ways they will be refused certain blessings from their church. And Protestant ministers don’t make political statements? How naive! The evening news shows candidates galore speaking at First CME Church or First Unitarian or whatever. You’ll never see that in a Catholic church! If you did, some ACLU type would scream "Church and State! Church and State!" The issue today is whether a professed Catholic can publicly support politicians whose moral teachings are repugnant to morality. In particular, abortion on demand has become so engrained in our national agenda that regularly year after year a million unborn babies are slaughtered by their mothers in the name of "free choice." The bishops are finally showing some cajones by insisting that Catholic politicians either stop calling themselves Catholic or stop making a public show of the Catholicism by taking communion while advocating anti-life policies. This of course only applies to Catholics who attend Catholic worship. Shunning is biblical. 1 Cor 5:11 We are not even as strict at Paul, who wouldn’t even allow them to attend the worship. We merely deny them communion.

Beginning with the original post, my comment is it is absolute RUBBISH. Neither the bishops nor the Vatican can stop politicians or people from being Cathollic. Catholicism is faith in the Creed not moral questions. Those who don’t know that should go back to school including the seniles of the Vatican.

Response:

Sure, they have made political statements from their pulpits for years. I know, I was trapped in Roman Catholicism for 29 years, I’ve seen and heard enough to know. However, now they are shouting boldly that if Catholics vote in certain ways they will be refused certain blessings from their church. And Protestant ministers don’t make political statements? How naive! The evening news shows candidates galore speaking at First CME Church or First Unitarian or whatever. You’ll never see that in a Catholic church! If you did, some ACLU type would scream "Church and State! Church and State!"

I never said they didn’t. In facvt I said they are now shoving their political/religious statements in the Governments facs as of the Oct 2002 Christian Coalitian meeting. Why is it Catholic ALWAYS take people AND the Bible out of context? Had you read this post entirely Cuneen you would have avoided this embrassment. The issue today is whether a professed Catholic can publicly support politicians whose moral teachings are repugnant to morality.

You mean like allowing child molestation to flourish? Allowing abortions of prominent Catholics as well as nuns? Torturing and killing millions of ionnocent people? Melding Paganism with Christianity? Helping Hitler kill more? etc etc etc Too bad we can’t "VOTE" for clergy eh? In particular, abortion on demand has become so engrained in our national agenda that regularly year after year a million unborn babies are slaughtered by their mothers in the name of "free choice."

Just before Moses (a Messiah type) arrived. They killed the babies. Just before Jesus came, they killed the babies. And just before Jesus comes back, they wull kill the babies. Surprised? The bishops are finally showing some cajones by insisting that Catholic politicians either stop calling themselves Catholic or stop making a public show of the Catholicism by taking communion while advocating anti-life policies.

Really? Then why is it they FINALLY decided to make mention of abortions and votes? Why not last year? The year before? The decade before? This of course only applies to Catholics who attend Catholic worship.

Catholicism – universal. You mean Universal, or global worship. The same worship they did at the Tower of Babel. Shunning is biblical. 1 Cor 5:11

So… abortion just started this year? Or is it because it’s an ELECTION year and Kerry is not the "perfect" Catholic? Hmmmm… seems WAY too obvious to me. We are not even as strict at Paul, who wouldn’t even allow them to attend the worship. We merely deny them

communion. Oh? So PAUL was wrong and you are right? Hypocrite! If this really was a church of Christ it would not only have denied them worship YEARS ago, the Vat of sin itself would never have to admit THEY THEMSELVES took part in abortions! — …Nicholas www.RemnantofGod.org

Response:

Christian greetings everyone in these last days of life on earth. Ahhh Nickie……are you feeling poorly? Please get well. Do Adventists have some form of Extreme Unction?

Well, I’ll say one thing in favor of Adventists, and I know quite a few of them personally, it’s not often that they feel or look poorly. They have dietary rules preventing them from eating meat, and it seems to work very well for them. A few months back I attended a large Adventist gathering/service, and out of hundreds of people, I saw only one obese person.

Response:

As opposed, say, to the REVEREND Al Sharpton, or the REVEREND Jesse Jackson? Why is it Catholic ALWAYS take people AND the Bible out of context? Had you read this post entirely Cuneen you would have avoided this embrassment.

Always out of context? I hadn’t seen the original, but from what I can see of the thread, you seem to be taken pretty well in context. And for what it’s worth, it is the political process that seems to be shoving itself in the Church’s face. I suggest you read the letters of Cardinal Ratzinger, and then read how Congressman Clay believes that he can dictate Church policy in toto. The issue today is whether a professed Catholic can publicly support politicians whose moral teachings are repugnant to morality. You mean like allowing child molestation to flourish?

Would you like to see the statistics for other religions? Professions? You will find there is nothing to single out in Catholicism, so this is a non-starter. Allowing abortions of prominent Catholics as well as nuns?

I seem to feel Maria Monk in here…do you have any cites? Or will you make the silly claim that "that’s what the tunnels in the abbeys are for"? Torturing and killing millions of innocent people?

Let’s see the stats for these millions. Melding Paganism with Christianity?

Non-starter. The only "melding" that occured was superficial, and done in order to make Christianity seem more familiar to new converts. Dogma and doctrine were never melded. Helping Hitler kill more?

And yet numerous Jewish leaders, including Albert Einstein, Israeli Prime Ministers Golda Meir and Moshe Sharett, and Chief Rabbi Isaac Herzog, expressed their public gratitude to Pius XII, praising him as a "righteous gentile," who had saved thousands of Jews during the Holocaust. In his meticulously researched and comprehensive 1967 book, Three Popes and the Jews, the Israeli historian and diplomat Pinchas Lapide, who had served as the Israeli Counsel General in Milan, and had spoken with many Italian Jewish Holocaust survivors who owed their life to Pius, provided the empirical basis for their gratitude, concluding that Pius XII "was instrumental in saving at least 700,000, but probably as many as 860,000 Jews from certain death at Nazi hands." To this day, the Lapide volume remains the definitive work, by a Jewish scholar, on the subject. Interestingly, the campaign of vilification against Pope Pius can be traced to the debut in Berlin in February 1963 of a play, by a young, Protestant, left-wing West German writer and playwright, Rolf Hochhuth. The Deputy, in which Hochhuth depicts Pacelli as a Nazi collaborator, guilty of moral cowardice and "silence" in the face of the Nazi onslaught, is a scathing indictment of Pope Pius XII’s alleged indifferences to the plight of European Jewry during the Holocaust. etc etc etc

Translation: "I haven’t the time to think of more baloney right now." Too bad we can’t "VOTE" for clergy eh?

Sure, many Protestant denominations can. I wonder how they choose! Do they vote for (1) The one that makes them feel better about their lives, or (2) The one that gets more press for their church? In particular, abortion on demand has become so engrained in our national agenda that regularly year after year a million unborn babies are slaughtered by their mothers in the name of "free choice." Just before Moses (a Messiah type) arrived. They killed the babies. Just before Jesus came, they killed the babies. And just before Jesus comes back, they wull kill the babies. Surprised?

So this makes it okay, then? Sounds to me like you have the attitude that you wrongfully attribute to Pope Pius XII. The bishops are finally showing some cajones by insisting that Catholic politicians either stop calling themselves Catholic or stop making a public show of the Catholicism by taking communion while advocating anti-life policies. Really? Then why is it they FINALLY decided to make mention of abortions and votes? Why not last year? The year before? The decade before?

What does it matter? Why haven’t other churches actually spoken out against it? In fact, why have other churches gone from being anti-abortion to pro-abortion in since the early 20th Century? Why does your God act so whimsical??? This of course only applies to Catholics who attend Catholic worship. Catholicism – universal. You mean Universal, or global worship. The same worship they did at the Tower of Babel.

Display of idiocy… You must do better than going off on a tangent that is so transparently nutty. Shunning is biblical. 1 Cor 5:11 So… abortion just started this year? Or is it because it’s an ELECTION year and Kerry is not the "perfect" Catholic? Hmmmm… seems WAY too obvious to me.

I bet it does. And if it were last year? Was Kerry campaigning last year? I do believe he was? And if it were 2002? Well, shucks! That’s just a way to beat down Hillary Clinton! And 2001…well, that would just give legitimacy to the Bush victory. No, wait. I’ll give you the chance to pinpoint a time in which the Church could actually stand up for its beliefs without annoying you. Which year would be good? We are not even as strict at Paul, who wouldn’t even allow them to attend the worship. We merely deny them communion. Oh? So PAUL was wrong and you are right? Hypocrite! If this really was a church of Christ it would not only have denied them worship YEARS ago, the Vat of sin itself would never have to admit THEY THEMSELVES took part in abortions!

Again, unfounded allegations won’t buy you any respect here, but to show you as an infantile bigot. Alberich "It would be atrocious," I said, "to kill a man in order to say bu-ba-baff!" "It would be atrocious," William remarked, "to kill a man even to say ‘Credo in unum Deum.’…"

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Christian greetings everyone in these last days of life on earth. Ahhh Nickie……are you feeling poorly? Please get well. Do Adventists have some form of Extreme Unction? Well, I’ll say one thing in favor of Adventists, and I know quite a few of them personally, it’s not often that they feel or look poorly. They have dietary rules preventing them from eating meat, and it seems to work very well for them. A few months back I attended a large Adventist gathering/service, and out of hundreds of people, I saw only one obese person.

Brilliant. BAM

Response:

Must be Nicky’s little remnant of Satan band supports abortion, same sex marriage, euthanasia and stem cell research. Good to see Nicky’s little band is showing their true colors. -Tony

Response:

Neither the bishops nor the Vatican can stop politicians or people from being Cathollic.

Sure they can. The apostles cast unrepentant sinners out of the church, and their successors can, too. Catholicism is faith in the Creed not moral questions. Those who don’t know that should go back to school including the seniles of the Vatican.

Really? Ananias and Saffira were rebuked by Peter and slain by the spirit for a theological error? No, because they had defrauded the church. Paul cast out sinners in 1 Cor 5. Was it for heresy? No, it was for fornication, and not merely fornication, but fornication with his stepmother. Christianity is about what we should believe (Creed) but even more it is about how we should live.

Response:

The bishops are finally showing some cajones by insisting that Catholic politicians either stop calling themselves Catholic or stop making a public show of the Catholicism by taking communion while advocating anti-life policies. Really? Then why is it they FINALLY decided to make mention of abortions and votes? Why not last year? The year before? The decade before?

The stimulus I think is the possibility of electing a Catholic president who gives scandal with his anti-life positions. The bishops have been consistently anti-abortion. They were anti-abortion when the southern baptists were for it, a position they have fortunately repented of. You make it sound like they are finally getting around to being against abortion, and that’s dishonest. Of course, you hate Catholicism so much that I’d be surprised if a little dishonesty bothers you if it’s for the cause of slaying the dragon. We are not even as strict at Paul, who wouldn’t even allow them to attend the worship. We merely deny them communion. Oh? So PAUL was wrong and you are right? Hypocrite! If this really was a church of Christ it would not only have denied them worship YEARS ago, the Vat of sin itself would never have to admit THEY THEMSELVES took part in abortions!

No, all I’m saying is that Paul was stricter. Perhaps with a young church (especially in the cesspool of Corinth) he had to be. What to do with the strayed sheep is always a judgement call. It’s not a matter of being wrong or right. The error of the Catholic pro-abortion folks is subtle. They PERSONALLY are against abortion, but they claim that in a pluralistic society you can’t force your beliefs on others, so we have to allow them to follow THEIR own consciences. In the past they have claimed the best way to fight abortion is through public education and awareness raising, NOT by passing sectarian laws. And so the bishops believed it was a matter of MEANS that kept them apart, but that all these Catholics shared the same ends, the end to abortion and the saving of infant lives. But these Catholic politicians are duplicitous. They continue to oppose any restrictions on abortion, even the most justified, like partial birth abortion. They support spending public money on providing free abortions and abortion counseling. They oppose any judicial nominees that are pro-life. In other words, they for all intents and purposes act like people promoting abortion, except for their little caveat, "I PERSONALLY oppose abortion." Funny way to oppose it! It has gradually become clear that they DO NOT share the same ends, the end of abortion and the saving of infant lives. And that is becoming increasingly clear to the bishops, at least to some of them. the Vat of sin itself would never have to admit THEY THEMSELVES took part in abortions!

I have no idea what you are talking about. Sounds like another one of your anti-Catholic mumblings….

Response:

The issue today is whether a professed Catholic can publicly support politicians whose moral teachings are repugnant to morality. You mean like allowing child molestation to flourish?

The newest non sequitur. The Catholic church does not nor has it ever taught that child molestation is not sinful. Molesting a child is a heinous sin. That there have been priests who have molested children is undeniable. That they have repented, been through therapy and in some cases molested children again is undeniable. That the bishops showed negligence in believing they could be trusted with children again is undeniable. But the claim that the church "allowed molestation to flourish" is pure propaganda. The total percent of priests accused is less than 4%, and not all the accused were guilty. In a church with over 60 million members and 100,000 men in the priesthood over the last fifty years, there may have been as many as 15,000 children molested by 4,000 priests. That’s a serious breach of faith by these priests, but nowhere near "allowing child molestation to flourish." Allowing abortions of prominent Catholics as well as nuns?

If a Catholic is aborted, he never grows up to be prominent and she to be a nun! I’m not sure who you are accusing of doing the "allowing", but it is objectively an excommunicatible sin to have or procure an abortion. It doesn’t make a difference if we are talking about a prominent Catholic or a nun, and the go-ahead was given by the pope himself. It’s a sin all around. Torturing and killing millions of innocent people?

It’s abortion that kills millions of innocent every year, and that’s the evil we should all be fighting. Melding Paganism with Christianity?

Why not? The Israelites and the Jews included Canaanite feasts (Unleavened Bread, for instance) and practices in their religion, in many cases continuing to follow them even now. Once they were turned to the worship of the True God, their pagan source was irrelevant. Right now, Protestantism is melding Gnosticism with Christianity with their rejection of any material signs. Revelation calls for incense as a sign of the prayers of the people of God, calls for altars of worship, calls for wine and bread and oil and water, the richness of creation before God’s throne. And all they are left with is an anemic Christianity Lite, bare walls, bare words, bare hearts. What your brand of Christianity is afraid of is the sounds and smells and richness of the Temple of God. In resisting all suspected paganism, you also lose your Jewish roots, where worship was also a thing of robes and instruments and sounds and smells and richness, the Shikinah presence of the living God. Helping Hitler kill more?

He didn’t need any help. He was quite proficient at killing not only Jews but Christians, especially those who stood up to him. The shame of the popes of the early 20th century was that none were martyred. Given the obvious sinfulness of the times, their lack of strong witness is best demonstrated by the fact that no one hated and was threatened by them enough to kill them. Only the courageous John Paul came close to martyrdom, and he is definitely the most influential pope of the century.

Response:

Neither the bishops nor the Vatican can stop politicians or people from being Cathollic. Sure they can. The apostles cast unrepentant sinners out of the church, and their successors can, too.

No doubt the Episcopalians would welcome the cast-offs and their money. Catholicism is faith in the Creed not moral questions. Those who don’t know that should go back to school including the seniles of the Vatican. Really? Ananias and Saffira were rebuked by Peter and slain by the spirit for a theological error? No, because they had defrauded the church.

It’s too bad such things don’t happen today, that would surely discourage church attendence and would please persons like myself. Paul cast out sinners in 1 Cor 5. Was it for heresy? No, it was for fornication, and not merely fornication, but fornication with his stepmother.

Too bad Paul is not around today to deal with the pedophile priests and bishops. Some of the RCC clergy has gone way beyond being mere step-m*****f*****s Christianity is about what we should believe (Creed) but even more it is about how we should live.

Well, I’m certainly unimpressed with what I’ve observed, and I grew up in RCC tradition.

Response:

But the claim that the church "allowed molestation to flourish" is pure propaganda. The total percent of priests accused is less than 4%, and not all the accused were guilty. In a church with over 60 million members and 100,000 men in the priesthood over the last fifty years, there may have been as many as 15,000 children molested by 4,000 priests. That’s a serious breach of faith by these priests, but nowhere near "allowing child molestation to flourish."

Repeatidly moving priests without warnings caused more children to be molested by that one pedophile than should have been. That is not negligence, not after the second time! Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me. — Alan "Ferrit" Ferris ()’.’.’() ( (T) ) ( ) . ( ) (")_(")

Response:

Neither the bishops nor the Vatican can stop politicians or people from being Cathollic. Sure they can. The apostles cast unrepentant sinners out of the church, and their successors can, too.

You misunderstand what you read and, in many ways, contradict Christ himself. Catholicism is faith in the Creed not moral questions. Those who don’t know that should go back to school including the seniles of the Vatican. Really? Ananias and Saffira were rebuked by Peter and slain by the spirit for a theological error? No, because they had defrauded the church. Paul cast out sinners in 1 Cor 5. Was it for heresy? No, it was for fornication, and not merely fornication, but fornication with his stepmother.

The verses from 1 Cor 5 are twisted in your mind since you very blatantly ignore the end of the quote: "hand this man over to Satan, so that the sinful nature may be destroyed and his spirit saved on the day of the Lord. " That is not a cast out person but a SAVED one. Finally, Paul wrote many un-Christian and un-Christlike things. If you want to follow what he says none of you should be in church or will be saved. He repeats the same old Judaic obsession with formulas that base salvation on what you do not what you believe in. Remember what he forbids women to be teachers? If that teaching stands, for example, most nuns and Christian school teachers would be out of work because they’re women. You quote what suites you without understanding what decides faith and what decides morals. Christianity is about what we should believe (Creed) but even more it is about how we should live.

That is not what Christ teaches besides how you vote does not mean how you live your life. You and the Vatican are presuming to know how I live my life and all of you are WRONG.

Response:

That there have been priests who have molested children is undeniable. That they have repented, been through therapy

The proper place for them is jail, not therapy. That the bishops showed negligence in believing they could be trusted with children again is undeniable.

The proper place for those bishops is jail for being criminally negligent. If a Catholic is aborted, he never grows up to be prominent and she to be a nun!

If a fetus is aborted, does it go to heaven or hell? Is this a question that has an answer? Right now, Protestantism is melding Gnosticism with Christianity with their rejection of any material signs. Revelation calls for incense as a sign of the prayers of the people of God, calls for altars of worship, calls for wine and bread and oil and water, the richness of creation before God’s throne. And all they are left with is an anemic Christianity Lite, bare walls, bare words, bare hearts.

Go to a black (Afro-American) pentecostal church service sometime, preferably one with a large choir. Then report back to us if you think they’re anemic. What your brand of Christianity is afraid of is the sounds and smells and richness of the Temple of God. In resisting all suspected paganism, you also lose your Jewish roots, where worship was also a thing of robes and instruments and sounds and smells and richness, the Shikinah presence of the living God.

…see above Helping Hitler kill more? He didn’t need any help. He was quite proficient at killing not only Jews but Christians, especially those who stood up to him.

Hitler was continuing a well entrenched and established European practice, one supported by the Roman Church for many centuries. No amount of denial on your part will get you around this very basic, unpleasant fact. The shame of the popes of the early 20th century was that none were martyred. Given the obvious sinfulness of the times, their lack of strong witness is best demonstrated by the fact that no one hated and was threatened by them enough to kill them.

I think it’s a darn shame myself. We certainly need some dead popes.

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Sure, they have made political statements from their pulpits for years. I know, I was trapped in Roman Catholicism for 29 years, I’ve seen and heard enough to know. However, now they are shouting boldly that if Catholics vote in certain ways they will be refused certain blessings from their church. And Protestant ministers don’t make political statements? How naive! The evening news shows candidates galore speaking at First CME Church or First Unitarian or whatever. You’ll never see that in a Catholic church! If you did, some ACLU type would scream "Church and State! Church and State!" The issue today is whether a professed Catholic can publicly support politicians whose moral teachings are repugnant to morality. In particular, abortion on demand has become so engrained in our national agenda that regularly year after year a million unborn babies are slaughtered by their mothers in the name of "free choice." The bishops are finally showing some cajones by insisting that Catholic politicians either stop calling themselves Catholic or stop making a public show of the Catholicism by taking communion while advocating anti-life policies. This of course only applies to Catholics who attend Catholic worship. Shunning is biblical. 1 Cor 5:11 We are not even as strict at Paul, who wouldn’t even allow them to attend the worship. We merely deny them communion. Beginning with the original post, my comment is it is absolute RUBBISH. Neither the bishops nor the Vatican can stop politicians or people from being Cathollic. Catholicism is faith in the Creed not moral questions. Those who don’t know that should go back to school including the seniles of the Vatican.

You make as much sense as a penny Shan. — …Nicholas www.RemnantofGod.org

Response:

Neither the bishops nor the Vatican can stop politicians or people from being Cathollic. Sure they can. The apostles cast unrepentant sinners out of the church, and their successors can, too.

sucessors? You mean the Apostles were sodomites with an appetite for young boys? I thought the PAGAN church was the forefather of that reality. Catholicism is faith in the Creed not moral questions. Those who don’t know that should go back to school including the seniles of the Vatican. Really? Ananias and Saffira were rebuked by Peter and slain by the spirit for a theological error? No, because they had defrauded the church. Paul cast out sinners in 1 Cor 5. Was it for heresy? No, it was for fornication, and not merely fornication, but fornication with his stepmother.

Then Paul would have cast out the entire lot in Rome! For the Vat of sin is truly a house of whores and whoremongers in every aspect of that word. Christianity is about what we should believe (Creed) but even more it is about how we should live.

Funny how you DON’T find that "theology" in a Bible. This is Christianity… Isaiah 8:20, "To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them." Ecclesiastes 12:13, "Let us hear the conclusion of the whole matter: Fear God, and keep his commandments: for this is the whole duty of man." James 2:12, "So speak ye, and so do, as they that shall be judged by the law of liberty." — …Nicholas www.RemnantofGod.org

Response:

Too bad Paul is not around today to deal with the pedophile priests and bishops. Some of the RCC clergy has gone way beyond being mere step-m*****f*****s

spoken like a true Catholic. Rome would be proud — …Nicholas www.RemnantofGod.org

Response:

Psalms 111:9, "… reverend is his name." Those men claim God’s title just as does your pope. They are no more Christians than the sodomites of Rome. Why is it Catholic ALWAYS take people AND the Bible out of context? Had you read this post entirely Cuneen you would have avoided this embrassment. Always out of context? I hadn’t seen the original, but from what I can see of the thread, you seem to be taken pretty well in context. And for what it’s worth, it is the political process that seems to be shoving itself in the Church’s face. I suggest you read the letters of Cardinal Ratzinger, and then read how Congressman Clay believes that he can dictate Church policy in toto.

I suggest you read ALL the articles that came from your church shoving church and state and other demonic ideas in the faces of world governments froms day one. For a "smattering" of a few HUNDRED articles, see this… http://www.remnantofgod.org/1-w-c.htm The issue today is whether a professed Catholic can publicly support politicians whose moral teachings are repugnant to morality. You mean like allowing child molestation to flourish? Would you like to see the statistics for other religions? Professions? You will find there is nothing to single out in Catholicism, so this is a non-starter.

LOL! You’re kidding right? Have you seen THIS…? http://www.remnantofgod.org/rccsex.htm That’s just a few hundred articles and links proving you just lied. PLUS, where elese do you see thousands of lawsuits against ministers? Sure, you may have the occasional "so called" Protestant minister gettign arrested in a boys bed. But when you compare that with the LARGEST KNOWN ORGANIZED COLLECTION OF SODOMITE MEN (the Vatican) on earth, you fall WAAAAY short of the smallest possibilty of being believed by even a brain damaged corpse. I f I am lying, why is the USA Government put a gag ordr on the media reporting on the thousands of lawsuits on this topic against Rome. Becaus eRome forced them to! They knew if the REAL truth got out the Vat of sin would collapse, and all the pews would be empty. However, judging by how the people in this and other NG’s defend these child molesters, I can see that "some" of you would stay in your church. Hmmmm why is that? Allowing abortions of prominent Catholics as well as nuns? I seem to feel Maria Monk in here…do you have any cites? Or will you make the silly claim that "that’s what the tunnels in the abbeys are for"?

Did you READ or witness the "mea culpa" of your own Pope/ WOW! Catholcis won’t read their bibles, and they won’t even read newspapers now?????? Torturing and killing millions of innocent people? Let’s see the stats for these millions.

Again… youjr Pope ADMITTED IT. March 12, 2000.. Ummm were you in a coma? Melding Paganism with Christianity? Non-starter. The only "melding" that occured was superficial, and done in order to make Christianity seem more familiar to new converts. Dogma and doctrine were never melded.

Really? Hmmm then your FOREFATHERS LIED??? Cardinal Newman admits in his book that; the "The use of temples, and these dedicated to particular saints, and ornamented on occasions with branches of trees; incense, lamps, and candles; votive offerings on recovery from illness; holy water; asylums; holydays and seasons, use of calendars, processions, blessings on the fields; sacerdotal vestments, the tonsure, the ring in marriage, turning to the East, images at a later date, …the ecclesiastical chant, and the Kyrie Eleison, are all of pagan origin, and sanctified by their adoption into the Church. {374}" -An Essay on the The Development of the Christian Doctrine John Henry "Cardinal Newman" p.359 (Also see According to Dr. E. D. Clarke, Travels, vol. i. p. 352.) The penetration of the religion of Babylon became so general and well known that Rome was called the "New Babylon." -Faith of our fathers 1917 ed. Cardinal Gibbons, p. 106 "Confiding then in the power of Christianity to resist the infection of evil, and to transmute the instruments and appendages of demon worship to an evangelical use… the rulers of the church from early times were prepared should occasion arise, to adopt, or imitate, or sanction the existing rites and customs of the (Pagan) populace." -Development of Christian Doctrine, Cardinal Newman. p. 372 Cardinal Newman lists many examples of things of "pagan origin" which the papacy brought into the church "in order to recommend the new religion to the heathen: He stated, "in order to recommend the new religion to the heathen:" "The use of temples, and these dedicated to particular saints, and ornamented on occasions with branches of trees; incense, lamps, and candles; holy water; asylums [hermitages, monasteries and convents]; [pagan] holy-days, processions, sacerdotal vestments, the tonsure, the ring in marriage, turning to the East, images, . . . and the Kyrie Eleison."–Cardinal J. H. Newman, An Essay on the Development of Christian Doctrine, 1920 edition, p.373 [Roman Catholic]. "The [Catholic] Church took the pagan philosophy and made it the buckler of faith against the heathen. She took the pagan Roman Pantheon, temple of all the gods, and made it sacred to all the martyrs; so it stands to this day. She took the pagan Sunday and made it the Christian Sunday. She took the pagan Easter and made it the feast we celebrate during this season . . . The Sun was a foremost god with heathendom . . . The sun has worshipers at this hour in Persia and other lands . . . Hence the Church would seem to say, ‘Keep that old pagan name [Sunday]. It shall remain consecrated, sanctified.’ And thus the pagan Sunday, dedicated to Balder, became the Christian Sunday, sacred to Jesus"–William L. Gildea, "Paschale Gaudium," in The Catholic World, 58, March, 1894, p. 809 [A Roman Catholic weekly]. "The mighty Catholic Church was little more then the Roman Empire baptized."– A. C, Flick, The Rise of the Mediaeval Church, 1909 edition, p. 148. From ancient Babylon came the cult of the virgin mother-goddess, who was worshiped as the highest of gods–see S. H. Langdon, Semitic Mythology, 1931 edition. This worship was taken over as Mary-worship by Rome. Heathen sun-worship on Sunday was likewise adopted by the Roman apostasy. ((( I HAVE HUNDREDS MORE QUOTES HERE FOLKS… http://www.remnantofgod.org/666-CHAR.htm#pagan It’s THAT easy to expose the bold faced LIARS) Helping Hitler kill more? And yet numerous Jewish leaders, including Albert Einstein, Israeli Prime Ministers Golda Meir and Moshe Sharett, and Chief Rabbi Isaac Herzog, expressed their public gratitude to Pius XII, praising him as a "righteous gentile," who had saved thousands of Jews during the Holocaust.

Lies. Do you believe everything they say? Oh wait.. you just admitted you don’t read Newspapers on March 12, 2000. But… but.. wait a minute.. How did you find out about these lies regarding Hitlers pope? OH! I GET IT! If it’s PRO Vatican.. you believe it. If it’s ANTI Vatican you don’t.. Ok..ok.. I get it now. Look .. you can’t have it both ways. Especially after YOUR OWN POPE ADMITTED to those things you "conveniently" forgot to read. …SNIPPING THE REST OF YOUR BIASED LIES — …Nicholas www.RemnantofGod.org

Response:

The issue today is whether a professed Catholic can publicly support politicians whose moral teachings are repugnant to morality. You mean like allowing child molestation to flourish? The newest non sequitur. The Catholic church does not nor has it ever taught that child molestation is not sinful. Molesting a child is a heinous sin.

Really? Then why did they ALLOW it to flourish? Why did they DROP ZERO TOLERANCE of it? Seems you need to ask your pope and fellow sodomites some QUESTIONS. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – That there have been priests who have molested children is undeniable. That they have repented, been through therapy and in some cases molested children again is undeniable. That the bishops showed negligence in believing they could be trusted with children again is undeniable. But the claim that the church "allowed molestation to flourish" is pure propaganda. The total percent of priests accused is less than 4%, and not all the accused were guilty. In a church with over 60 million members and 100,000 men in the priesthood over the last fifty years, there may have been as many as 15,000 children molested by 4,000 priests. That’s a serious breach of faith by these priests, but nowhere near "allowing child molestation to flourish." Allowing abortions of prominent Catholics as well as nuns? If a Catholic is aborted, he never grows up to be prominent and she to be a nun!

Oh? Then your bishops and cardinals LIED on March 12 2000??? Why is it you catholcis CONVENIENTLY forget these facts? I’m not sure who you are accusing of doing the "allowing", but it is objectively an excommunicatible sin to have or procure an abortion. It doesn’t make a difference if we are talking about a prominent Catholic or a nun, and the go-ahead was given by the pope himself. It’s a sin all around. Torturing and killing millions of innocent people? It’s abortion that kills millions of innocent every year, and that’s the evil we should all be fighting.

Ok. so lets forget about the millions your popes killed and make nice nice? Melding Paganism with Christianity? Why not?

BECAUSE GOD SAID DON’T DO IT? Would that suffice? "And Elijah came unto all the people, and said, How long halt ye between two opinions? if the LORD be God, follow him: but if Baal, then follow him…" -1 Kings 18:21, "When the LORD thy God shall cut off the nations from before thee, whither thou goest to possess them, and thou succeedest them, and dwellest in their land; Take heed to thyself that thou be not snared by following them, after that they be destroyed from before thee; and that thou enquire not after their gods, saying, How did these nations serve their gods? even so will I do likewise. Thou shalt not do so unto the LORD thy God: for every abomination to the LORD, which he hateth, have they done unto their gods; for even their sons and their daughters they have burnt in the fire to their gods. What thing soever I command you, observe to do it: thou shalt not add thereto, nor diminish from it." -Deuteronomy 12:29-32 wow… defend defend defend! That’s all I see Catholics doing lately. — …Nicholas www.RemnantofGod.org

Response:

And yet you seem to have no problem with their "shoving their political/religious statements in the Governments facs [sic]." Why is that? Why is it Catholic ALWAYS take people AND the Bible out of context? Had you read this post entirely Cuneen you would have avoided this embrassment. Always out of context? I hadn’t seen the original, but from what I can see of the thread, you seem to be taken pretty well in context. And for what it’s worth, it is the political process that seems to be shoving itself in the Church’s face. I suggest you read the letters of Cardinal Ratzinger, and then read how Congressman Clay believes that he can dictate Church policy in toto. I suggest you read ALL the articles that came from your church shoving church and state and other demonic ideas in the faces of world governments froms day one. For a "smattering" of a few HUNDRED articles, see this… http://www.remnantofgod.org/1-w-c.htm

I suggest that I have read more of them than have you, my sadly deluded compadre. The issue today is whether a professed Catholic can publicly support politicians whose moral teachings are repugnant to morality. You mean like allowing child molestation to flourish? Would you like to see the statistics for other religions? Professions? You will find there is nothing to single out in Catholicism, so this is a non-starter. LOL! You’re kidding right? Have you seen THIS…? http://www.remnantofgod.org/rccsex.htm That’s just a few hundred articles and links proving you just lied.

Quoting yourself or your own webpage is hardly evidence to support your argument. But, read: OVERALL DATA The National Child Abuse and Neglect Data Systems was developed by the Children