Posted on 10/14/2007 9:38:53 PM PDT by Alex Murphy
Throw in Ted Haggard and make it a threesome.
Amen.
If the messenger is spreading lies, then he should be rebuked. If the messenger is slandering others, in this case, the majority of priests who are faithful to their vows of celibacy, then he should be rebuked. If the messenger is trying to discourage lay Catholics by bashing the Church and its clergy, then he should be rebuked.
Unam Sanctam is 100% right. You, Alex Murphy, and several others on this forum seize on any scandal that involves the Catholic Church in order to discredit it. It doesn’t matter what the scandal is or how many people are involved, you trumpet any negative news about the Church as “proof” of its illegitimacy. Frankly, it’s becoming tiresome and offensive.
Yeah, if we look at the circumstances, I would wager the Vatican corroborated his activity to some extent. After all, he was “anonymous” on this television show, so the Church could have simply said, “well, we don’t know who it is.” The fact that they went to the trouble to hunt him down and then publicly banish him seems convincing enough that he’s not play-acting.
Let ‘em come.
We can handle it. If the gates of hell will not prevail against us, then we should be okay now.
You see my FRiend, Alex is a fan of the Trail of Baloney
Excuse me, I mean the "trail of blood". Read the link and be AMAZED at how some Baptists, who really are historically Protestant, reject the label "protestant". :)
Warning: .pdf link above, but it's not that big, and you'll probably find it useful in refuting those who really are protestant, yet insist they are not.
Unfortunately, it does not apply to the PROTESTANT Episcopal Church of the USA--then again, it perhaps is owing to its Roman Catholic heritage in liturgy and worship!
Touche' Especially in the ECUSA. However, there IS a way to discourage gays in the priesthood: Allow priests to marry (some churches are already guided by married priests--most, formerly Anglican/Episcopal) while confining celibacy to the monasteries and convents (that was indeed the practice in the early church, after all).
Well he might not be gay but he is a liar. So to me that is quite enough to make him unsuitable for his post.
When I posted a thread about a child molesting presbyterian preacher a few years ago, I ended up on a Catholic ping list.
Feel free to post threads about protestant pervs. I won't get defensive or offended.
There are two types of Catholics on FR: Those that are in DENIAL about the disproportionate number of homosexual clergy and also see priests as near saintlike, rather than as just human beings, and those who are PISSED OFF and want them flushed out of their church.
Bzzzzzt. Assuming facts not in evidence. Ten yard penalty...repeat the down.
BTW: Lots of gay ministers, rabbis, and imams as well. The difference is that "middle management" (aka the bishops) tolerated this BS starting in the mid-60s, and only recently do we see these folks finally getting flushed out.
Wow - I don't think I've ever seen a post that pegs me so perfectly wrong. Bearing false witness is a sin, you know.
I’m not defending homosexuals in the clergy, especially active ones or those who embrace the gay ideology instead of the Catholic teachings on morality. I’m just objecting to the way certain Protestants on FR seem to revel in posting news items that puts the Catholic Church in a bad light. I feel the same way about foreigners’ criticizing America — there’s plenty about American culture that I often criticize, but it sticks in my craw hearing Europeans or other foreigners criticize my homeland.
I think I saw this guy on Dateline's "To Catch a Predator".
ROTFL! Can you imagine reading the job posting for the recently open "Vatican Official" job in the National Catholic Register? According to the Monsignor, one of the job requirements is that the applicant must act gay!
The first step to resolving the matter begins with admitting that the RC church with its human tradition of a "celibate" priesthood has a morals problem involving sodomy among other things.
Which reminds me of the story about a man who goes to a psychiatrist. The psychiatrist suggests that they start off with a Rorschach test. So he holds up the first picture and asks the man what he sees. "A man and a woman making love in a park," the man replies.
The psychiatrist holds up the second picture and asks the man what he sees. "A man and a woman making love in a boat."
He holds up the third picture. "A man and a woman making love at the beach."
This goes on for the rest of the set of pictures; with the man saying he sees a couple making love in every one of the pictures. At the end of the test, the psychiatrist looks over his notes and says, "It seems like you have a preoccupation with sex."
"Me?" says the patient. "You're the one with the dirty pictures!"
The first step to resolving the matter begins with admitting that the RC church with its human tradition of a "celibate" priesthood has a morals problem involving sodomy among other things.
Which reminds me of the story about a man who goes to a psychiatrist. The psychiatrist suggests that they start off with a Rorschach test. So he holds up the first picture and asks the man what he sees. "A man and a woman making love in a park," the man replies.
The psychiatrist holds up the second picture and asks the man what he sees. "A man and a woman making love in a boat."
He holds up the third picture. "A man and a woman making love at the beach."
This goes on for the rest of the set of pictures; with the man saying he sees a couple making love in every one of the pictures. At the end of the test, the psychiatrist looks over his notes and says, "It seems like you have a preoccupation with sex."
"Me?" says the patient. "You're the one with the dirty pictures!"
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.