gay guys jacking each other off…

Might I suggest Hebrews 7:27; 9:26-28; 10:10-14.

Christ died once for all of mankind. The waffer, and the wine does not turn into flesh, and blood again, and again, and again.

So cut him some slack – he is fixed and dare not look to the whole of the truth lest the small part he has accepted be shattered.

On April 16th, 2008 at 2:33 pm, BrianNY said:

#55 said:

While not reflective of the gay community at large, a majority (over 80%) of the priests who engaged in the abuse were homosexual.

I never understood the liberal argument that man on boy pedophilia is only a Catholic Church problem and NOT a homosexual problem.

If the quickest “80%” solution to the Catholic Church’s current problem was followed (ie. banishing all homosexuals from the priesthood) the Catholic Church would suffer even more wrath and ridicule from the gay lobby (which ironically claims selective “outrage” at Catholic Priest pedophilia to begin with.)It would be the same reaction that blood banks received from gay activists when they tried to statistically address the dangerous issue of HIV tainted blood in the donation supplies.)

I agree, although I find little evidence to show that these assaults were anything but homosexually oriented. Even a review of the Boston Globe’s coverage (http://www.boston.com/globe/spotlight/abuse/), where even though they constantly use the terms “children” and “victims,” all the stories describe assaults on young boys. If there were girls involved, they were a distinct minority, and such assaults would have received excessive coverage if for no other reason than to defuse the homosexual aspect of the assaults. I see none of that.

On April 16th, 2008 at 3:11 pm, Rusty said:

The Church teaching on same sex attraction (SSA) would not bar someone who has SSA from the priesthood – provided he remains celibate, which is what all persons not in a marital relationship are called to do in line with the dignity of the human person.

Unfortunately, the abuse scandal has led some to claim that those with SSA should not be priests. The idea being that they’re more likely to be pedophiles.

As I’ve written before, even man-on-boy pedophilia does not necessarily make that man a homosexual. Some of these predators target both sexes. Some are even married or have relationships with women. It’s a sickness that has little to do with homosexuality.

I respectfully disagree: if you are preying on young boys, you are a homosexual pedophile. Your references to some predators targeting both sexes or being married etc. have no bearing on this situation. Even if one were prone to prey on both sexes, same sex sexual assaults are, by definition, homosexual. As referenced above in the “less than conservative” Boston Globe, all the weasel words in the world do not change the fact that these “priests” were preying exclusively on young boys.

I find it interesting that the same liberals (I won’t presume that you are one of these, Rusty) who easily, and no doubt justifiably, attack these predatory priests both make no or little mention of the homosexual aspect of the assaults, and will reflexively and hypocritically attack the Boy Scouts for refusing to allow gays to be Scoutmasters to prevent this very type of scandal from even having a chance of occurring. Let me acknowledge for the record that I do not believe that all homosexuals are pedophiles, but you can be sure that the ones that are will be attracted to venues where they can get unsupervised access to young boys. It is not that “those with SSA are more likely to be pedophiles,” but rather that the children come first, and every effort must be made to ensure their safety. It is for this reason that the Girl Scouts have the following policy: “Because we believe that female role models are especially important to young girls during their developing years, men
working directly with girls are asked to serve as part of a leadership team that includes women.” In other words, you get a female “teammate” to ensure that everything remains above board. Maybe the church, and even the Boy Scouts, need to adopt this approach.

If the Catholic Church, and in particular, that enabling swine Bernard “Bunny” Law took the same steps to prevent these assaults as the Boy or Girl Scouts do, I think the problem would have been orders of magnitude smaller in scope, if it were a problem at all.

A simpler question. Why is it the Bible is to be taken literally except in any and all instances that might even merely support Catholic doctrine? In which case (like the Eucharist), the Bible becomes metaphor or symbolism…or complete books are omitted wholesale?

Well, let’s see: Jesus is King of Kings, right? And Mary is His Mother, right? Therefore, Mary is the Queen Mother, which, in the House of David, was a very important position. There’s also a big difference between a nasty Phoenician goddess and the humble maiden who did one of the most important things ever. Catholics know the difference.

Why does the Pope bow down to the sunburst image, and the image of the Queen of Heaven?

I’ve already explained the purpose of rays on a monstrance. I think, being a lifelong Catholic and tolerably educated on what things mean in my creed, would know we’re not engaging in sun- worship. Son-worship, yes, but not a gaseous ball 93 million miles away.

As far as honoring images: you ever put a wreath or flowers on a grave? Kiss the picture of your wife or child? Keep the pic of a departed one in a prominent place? The same thing with the Saints. We don’t worship wood or metal or stone. Indeed, we worship none but God. But we honor our elder brothers and sisters and our friends.

“Ye shall make you no idols nor graven image, nether rear up a standing image, neither shall ye set up any image of stone in your land, to bow down unto it: for I am the LORD your G-d.”

Why does the Pope bow down to the sunburst image, and the image of the Queen of Heaven?

“The children gather wood, and the Fathers kindle the fire, and the women knead their dough, to the make cakes to the Queen of Heaven, and to pour out drink offerings unto other gods, that they may provoke me to anger.”

Why does the Pope call Mary the Queen of Heaven, and pray to her Prince Concort?

It’s called transubstantiation, changing the eucharistic bread and wine into the body and blood of Christ….

Why would you imagine he would side with the USA instead of the Catholic illegal aliens?

Re-read my post, Thacker. You only understood about 60% of what was written there.

My assertion is not that the Pope would “side with” the USA versus Catholic illegal immigrants, but that he would recognize our right – as a sovereign nation – to uphold our laws, which are just. He would also chastise those who break our laws because the portion of the Catechism I referenced clearly requires them to adapt to, respect, and obey the laws of this nation. They break the laws by crossing the border illegally, therefore they are not in the right or absolved of their obligations.

He would not give them a pass anymore than he would give a “Catholic” politician like John Kerry a pass on his stance on abortion.

Don’t expect to hear that from the MSM, though. They usually get about 40% of the story straight – the rest is either twisted or omitted to fit their meta-narrative.

Immigrants are obliged to RESPECT WITH GRATITUDE

At what point where you hear them say ‘we didn’t cross the border, the border crossed us’ do you hear ‘GRATITUDE?’ At what point when they say we want to be able to take classes in Spanish do you hear respect for the heritage of the country they go toward?

The point is that aliens can just say that they are poor and downtrodden. The only caveat necessary for their acceptance in a new country is that they are ‘in search of the security and the means of livelihood which he cannot find in his country of origin.’

So basically if they come from a country that doesn’t have anything, they are justified in going to a country that has more. Would it be OK if I rob a bank in search of the means and livelihood that I can’t find in my own house or profession? How would this be different? It seems to me like ‘Thou shalt not steal’ has some interesting nuances in the Catholic Church’s stance on immigration.