quote:

Originally posted by philnic:

quote:

Originally posted by Doug Spaulding:
...Funnily is a good word.

Funnily? Like this?

Which reminds me, I'll be attending a dog show at the RMS Queen Mary in a few weeks.

quote:

Originally posted by jkt:
...I'll be attending a dog show at the RMS Queen Mary in a few weeks.

Dogs on ships? Whatever will they think of next?

Ask the Bishop

Q: In an interview with Beliefnet, Hans Küng said that the Vatican knew for decades about sexually abusive priests and the Bishops' mishandling of them. In you opinion, why did they allow the situation to continue for so long?
Dear Lancer 92112,

A: Hans Küng is probably the world's most quoted theologian in the 20th century. A professor of Catholic Theology at the University of Tübingen, he was one of the obvious and clear leaders of the Second Vatican Council that began the Reformation of the Catholic Church under the great Pope John XXIII. He was later removed from the position as Catholic theologian in a purge of liberal thinkers instigated by John Paul II and carried out by Cardinal Josef Ratzinger, who now rules the Vatican as Benedict XVI.

I have read most of his work. I had him lead a clergy conference for the clergy of my diocese shortly after he was purged. I have also attended lectures he gave at Union Theological Seminary in New York. We have eaten meals together on three occasions. I tell you these things to let you know of my great admiration and deep affection for Hans Küng. I also suggest that he knows more about the inner workings of the Roman Catholic Church, so that if he said the things attributed to him in the Beliefnet interview, I would be certain they were accurate.

I am quite certain that sexually abusive priests were well known to Catholic authorities for years. There was a history of bishops and archbishops moving offending clergy to another jurisdiction rather than confronting the issue. My guess is that both the abuse and the cover-up were quite systemic, far more prevalent than has yet been admitted or faced. Perhaps that is the clue to their allowing it to continue. If it was as widespread as we now believe, it must have involved people in high places, including bishops, archbishops and cardinals. A thorough investigation and a complete and honest admission might well have constituted so severe a threat to the life and integrity of that noble institution that they deemed their needs better served by dishonesty rather than honesty, by cover-up rather than admission. Of course, in the long run, the integrity of the Church itself is eroded and the exodus of members that begins as a trickle and ends with a flood.

I do not think Roman Catholic officials have yet understood how many lay people were alienated from the Church by this behavior. Nor do I believe that thus far there has been anything like a full disclosure, so the issue will not end yet. Catholic piety has required the repression of healthy sexuality for service in this institution. Unfortunately, when healthy sexuality is repressed, unhealthy sexuality always rises. Repressed sexuality comes back as pornography and child abuse. Perhaps the place where Rome ought to begin is to ask why sexual abstinence or celibacy is a prerequisite for leadership. I think that is where sickness enters the tradition.

Thanks for raising the issue.

– John Shelby Spong

HEY!!! This SPONG is a nut case. He denies everything basically Christianity. This guy is theologically sick. Why Doug Spaulding is following someone who totally denies the meaning of Christ and his divinity is beyond me.

What's wrong with you Doug Spaulding???

quote:

Originally posted by embroiderer:
What's wrong with you Doug Spaulding???

I don't know.

Perhaps you didn't read the above post, or perhaps you think the Roman Catholic cover-up was OK.

I do not.

quote:

Originally posted by Doug Spaulding:

Perhaps you didn't read the above post, or perhaps you think the Roman Catholic cover-up was OK.

I do not.

I'm a former Roman Catholic. 8 years elementary school and 4 years Catholic high school. Plus working in the system. I know the mess. But I;m talking about your relationship with Spong. There is absolutely no defending his theology. It's wrong from the very start. He denies everything that is Christianity at it's fundamentals. He does not believe Jesus was bodily ressurected. That is the basic premise that Christianity stands on. No ressurection from the grave, no Christianity. That's stated right in the gospels.

But you continue to go on for months quoting this Spong. That's why I am asking you, what's wrong with you?

quote:

Originally posted by embroiderer:
But I'm talking about your relationship with Spong.

Thanks for clearing that up. I was talking about the above post.

Wow, embroiderer... Seems like you and Doug have different religious beliefs, and don't agree on much. My question is---so what? Get over it.

Doug, just this past week I read a newspaper article talking about the report that has recently come out, regarding abuses of the Catholic church in Ireland. Man, the whole story is absolutely horrifying, and almost unbelievable regarding the terrible things that went on.

This complete corruption, up to the highest levels of the church, has pretty much stripped the institution of any real power in Ireland. And I think the same can be said in America (though the church has never had as much power here as it has had in Europe).

quote:

Originally posted by theoctobercountry:
Man, the whole story is absolutely horrifying, and almost unbelievable regarding the terrible things that went on.

I know. When you suppress your natural sexuality, it always comes out ugly.

And when the church tries to "de-gay" someone, the person usually winds up very disturbed psychologically and some have even been known to kill themselves.

It's a sad story indeed. When will the RC church get with the programme and move into the 21st century? (Or the 20th for that matter!)

Doug Spaulding, this crap about suppressing natural sexual desire and it comes out ugly is right out of hell. This is your friend Bishop Spong's theology. Not scriptural. Because many Catholic boys/men go into the priesthood without a clue about how God works in one's life, does not condone what you are pushing. Many went into the priesthood because of family pressure or some fanciful whim of sanctity that turned into a personal obsession.

There are far far many good Catholic priests that have been injured by this scandal. Many good priests have talked about how they have been ridiculed and taunted on city streets because of the abuse by others. Have you forgotten Catholic priests were allowed to marry all the way to the 1400 or 1500 hundreds? The problem exists even in Protestant churches were marriage is allowed. Then you have those liberal churches like Spong preaches at that allow everything. I can't imagine how he is going to explain this at the judgement when even a simple impure thought turning into a fixed desire against a woman is considered adultery according to Jesus Christ!

quote:

Originally posted by theoctobercountry:
Wow, embroiderer... Seems like you and Doug have different religious beliefs, and don't agree on much. My question is---so what? Get over it.

So what? Obviously you need some clues about Christianity. Christianity is actually based on one event: a man came back from the dead, walked thru walls, appeared and disappeared, and said how to follow the same path to live forever. Because of Jesus Christ, calendars were restarted at year 1. The church rises and falls, like Phil Knox has mentioned, on this one event. Doug Spaulding adheres to the thinking of a man who doesn't believe in the death and new life of Jesus Christ. Many people thru the centuries have tried to disprove the resurection of Christ in order to topple Christian faith.


http://www.christianity.co.nz/res-2.htm

Well, I'm just curious as to why you seem to fly into a rage whenever someone doesn't agree with your views on religion. Doug obviously has different beliefs than you, but I can't recall that he's ever been anything but a gentleman when expressing his viewpoint.

quote:

Originally posted by theoctobercountry:
Well, I'm just curious as to why you seem to fly into a rage whenever someone doesn't agree with your views on religion. Doug obviously has different beliefs than you, but I can't recall that he's ever been anything but a gentleman when expressing his viewpoint.

Please!! Don't give me or others this basic nonsense. You don't go around twisting the facts and try to get away with it no matter how the gentleman you want someone to sound.

Doug Spaulding comes from the viewpoint that Christ condones sexual lifestyles of all sorts. That is absolutely wrong!! And scripture says the opposite.

After much wrestling with one's emotions and passions, one hopefully learns that it's a futile struggle to overcome any sexual obstacle if left to our own devices of trying the darndest to gain control. It has absolutely nothing to do with us in that area except our willingness to die to self and let God replace the emptiness with Himself. And 'that' is the struggle of all struggles.

Civility and common courtesy are considered "basic nonsense" here? I'm not discussing matters of doctrine in these posts, just elementary human interaction.

There seem to be a number of posters on this board who feel they can spread the love of Christ through anger, sarcasm, and bullying. Hmmm, not exactly the way to win others to the cause, to my way of thinking. In fact, such tactics are likely to have exactly the opposite effect.