Will married priest solve the problem ?greenspun.com : LUSENET : Catholic : One Thread |
Or would it just lead tour incest ?
-- Tony (awalker@teknett.com), May 08, 2002
Celibacy is not the problem it is priest not being celibate. Allowing priest to marry is not an answer. A pedofile will still commit his sinful crime married or not. A marriage vow can be broken just as easily as a vow of chastity.
-- Michael (pickandpen@aol.com), May 08, 2002.
TonyYou have been told countless times that the celibacy issue has absolutely nothing to do with the sex abuse situation. When are you going to accept that? This forum is filled with answers on this issue.
-- Fred Bishop (fcbishop@globaleyes.net), May 08, 2002.
Tony,Answer this question. Are you aware that married men have been found to be pedophiles? If you think about the answer, that should answer your subject question.
-- Glenn (glenn@excite.com), May 08, 2002.
In answer to Tony's question - No. No. No. No. and I think you know that too, Tony. MaryLu
-- MaryLu (mlc327@juno.com), May 08, 2002.
(Welcome back, Glenn. John)
-- (jfgecik@hotmail.com), May 09, 2002.
I already have my own answer, I just wanted to see if fellowers are still in denial.
-- Tony (awalker@teknett.com), May 09, 2002.
Who are fellowers in denial of what?You have your own answer;
tour what?
-- eugene c. chavez (chavezec@pacbell.net), May 09, 2002.
Tony,Did your parents marry? Did their marriage lead to incest in your family?
Thanks for the answer, oh great source of wisdom. ;-)
Mateo
-- (MattElFeo@netscape.net), May 09, 2002.
No, no incest in my family or any others that I'm not aware of. But incest would be the point to forcus on if it involves married priest, wouldn't you agree ?
-- Tony (awalker@teknett.com), May 09, 2002.
"Who are fellowers in denial of what? You have your own answer; tour what?-- eugene c. chavez (chavezec@pacbell.net), May 09, 2002"
Well, not sure, from this point I would say Fred Bishop, I don't mean the pedo scandial, I'm refering tour other things in the news like nuns getting abortion and sex between nuns and priest, well, when he accuse the person who post that accuse them of slanders and they will burn in hell, yes, I would call that close minded and denial.
-- Tony (awalker@teknett.com), May 09, 2002.
TonyYou are the narrow minded one. one thing I have learned in my almost long 58 years of life is not to take everyting that is said as Gospel truth EXCEPT the GOSPEL of Christ and the Saintly Apostles.
There are many stories out there in this secular world that are passed around so much that by the time I hear it it becomes yet another story that no longer even remotely resembles the original story or happening.
So your label of me is about as unfair and libelous as they can be had. I try my best to understand the truth as it appears and anything that looks distorted will be shown for what it is as I see it until someone who HAS first hand knowledge can prove me wrong in which case you have been totally unsuccessful to this day.
If you ahve any idea of what I am speaking of just try learning the 10 Commandments of the Old Testament. Two of them apply in this forum which you seem not to know or to understand fully, "Thou Shalt not Kill" and the other is "Thou Shalt not Bear False Witness".
Do you understand that one YET?
-- Fred Bishop (fcbishop@globaleyes.net), May 09, 2002.
I see. Thanks, Tony.We know you wouldn't deny anything useful for bashing priests and nuns and the Church. All donations appreciated, Hmm? And, uh-- a married priest--? Certainly not safe to leave his own children alone in the house with him, Hmm?
-- eugene c. chavez (chavezec@pacbell.net), May 09, 2002.
"Fred said: Thou Shalt not Kill" and the other is "Thou Shalt not Bear False Witness"."There isn't a "Thou Shalt not Kill" in the Ten commandments, there's a "Thou shalt not murder" however. Yes, I understand False Witness, but these are just nearly news or accusitions. If there is such words that go about shouldn't at least the fellowers look into it ?
-- Tony (awalker@teknett.com), May 09, 2002.
I also would like to add, the Ten commandments are the base, you can take the word of Christ, but you shouldn't take the words in the old testiment serious, unless it is during and before mosses.
-- Tony (awalker@teknett.com), May 09, 2002.
Tony has spoken...let it be so. ;-)Mateo
-- (MattElFeo@netscape.net), May 09, 2002.
MateoI am beginning to wonder how acorns are in Tony's head. He forgets Christ actually was fully obedient to the Old Testament and taught his followers the Old Testament. That is all they had at the time he lived. Seems to me he needs a good 10 years to relearn the Old Testament all over again.
Exodus 20:13 "You shall not kill" Deuteronomy 5:17 "You shall not kill" Now where do you see murder I believe Tony has that one totally wrong.
Now on the "thou shall not bear false witness". I suppose the Enquirer and other gossip papers are not full of lies and half truths. Even the news papers print things based on contrived guesses. Hmmmm I wonder if Tony has really understood GOD and his commandments. He did in fact write them for Moses. If that is so, I never saw one word from Christ that says the Old Testament is to be ignored. Hmmmmmm I wonder where Christ screwed up. Hmmmmmm I guess we as Christians have made a mistake in following Christ or did Christ mislead us. Hmmm maybe the apostles made a mistake. Hmmmm guess I will have to re-read the whole Bible from cover to cover again to find the mistake. HMMMMMM.
What ever Mateo, Tony will learn the truth --GOD willing. Blessings.
-- Fred Bishop (fcbishop@globaleyes.net), May 09, 2002.
"I am beginning to wonder how acorns are in Tony's head. He forgets Christ actually was fully obedient to the Old Testament and taught his followers the Old Testament. That is all they had at the time he lived."No, really, there's two commandments that he broke "I am the Lord thy God, you shall have no other God before thy" and "Remember the Sabbeth day and keep it holy" But don't be asking Catholics for this opinion, you going have ask the Jews. Because it is through them that these commandments were broken, not throught the eyes of Catholics and Christ. But why do you assume anything that is written after moses is close for interpretation ? Well, the 7 deadly sins are wisdom that should be acounted for. There are alot of support in the old testiment that supports killing, not sure if it's the one that Christ refer to. According tour bibical science it was "Thy shall not murder" But I have this theory, if Christians or any other religion support polictical power and correctness, then they are in support of violents, killing and whatever that may lead, because it is by there support that advocates it. I don't know why anyone can respect this view, I would like Catholic to change for the better.
-- Tony (awalker@teknett.com), May 09, 2002.
What Bloody religion are you esposing? You sound like a heretic.
-- Fred Bishop (fcbishop@globaleyes.net), May 09, 2002.
John,Thanks for the welcome back. I have tried to periodically read the forum, but have rarely posted. The latest rash of anti-Catholics has increased the number of new posts to where it is tough to keep up.
Also, I have been spending more time with the family so I have less time to fall back to my biggest problem/sin I am dealing with. I think the regulars know what that is.
God Bless.
-- Glenn (glenn@excite.com), May 09, 2002.
"What Bloody religion are you esposing? You sound like a heretic.-- Fred Bishop (fcbishop@globaleyes.net), May 09, 2002."
I'm refering to the Jews view tour Christ, how would that make me a Heritic ?
-- Tony (awalker@teknett.com), May 09, 2002.
Fred,If my memory serves me, Tony is agnostic (maybe atheist). He's mostly just concerned that the US government is totally corrupt and should be overthrown. I don't think he has any idea what Christianity is.
Dennis seems to like Tony. He has never been upset with the fact that Tony espouses decriminalizing pedophilia as a "solution." So much for Dennis' "objective" commentary and desire to fight child abuse. Hahaha.
Mateo
-- (MattElFeo@netscape.net), May 09, 2002.
Am shocked at the number of replies to Tony's posts.
Seems that 75% of his stuff is so poorly written as to be unintelligible, while the other 25% (the intelligible) is sheer lunacy.
Tony, please go into "lurk" mode and just READ stuff here without posting, so that you can learn the fullness of the truth -- i.e., the Catholic faith -- and so that you will stop wasting the time of others.
-- (@@@.@), May 10, 2002.
I agree with the lurk mode invitation. I just recently shared two personal encounters that dealt with men in marriage who still engaged in pedophilia. Seems Tony's sponge is lacking the ability of absorption.
-- Melissa (holy_rhodes@earthlink.net), May 10, 2002.
Hello,I dont think that married priest will solve the problem. The question is not whether you are a married or unmarried, the is how strong are you rooted in the GOD, for whose calling you have accepted. You really dont have to try on your own strength. If really you were ordained by the will of God then definitely the One who called you will be faithfull even when we are not faithfull. He will start where you end and he will never allow you to stumble, since He is always at your right hand.
God Bless
-- Xavier David (xavier_david24@yahoo.com), May 10, 2002.
Hello Every body,I was in such a haste that I did not even bothered to see the language errors. Sorry for the same.
God Bless
-- Xavier David (xavier_david24@yahoo.com), May 10, 2002.
Xavier DavidYou nailed it well taht a priest needs to remind himself of his ordination and pray many times everyday as well as the rest of us lay people lest we fall to the evil one to serous sin. As a human being first he, the priest is as vulnerable to all of the things of he secular world.
We as lay people need to do all we can to help support these people of religious life in their daily lives in keeping them from going astray by distracting them from the evils being put in from of them by satan and his helpers. Prayer works in many forms and are always welcome.
Blessings and Shalom.
-- Fred Bishop (fcbishop@globaleyes.net), May 10, 2002.
"Fred, If my memory serves me, Tony is agnostic (maybe atheist). He's mostly just concerned that the US government is totally corrupt and should be overthrown. I don't think he has any idea what Christianity is. -- (MattElFeo@netscape.net), May 09, 2002."Don't be silly, of course I believe in God, I just don't believe anyone carrys the Truth as for Melissa, I don't support incest, that would lead tour Deformity and a shorter life span.
-- Tony (awalker@teknett.com), May 10, 2002.
I may also want to add, I don't wish to overthrow the government, I wish to make it smaller, party believes that government should stay out of people lives both moraly and econamicly, we are the complete opposite of Republicans, Democrats and Authortarians.
-- Tony (awalker@teknett.com), May 10, 2002.
"I just recently shared two personal encounters that dealt with men in marriage who still engaged in pedophilia. Seems Tony's sponge is lacking the ability of absorption.-- Melissa (holy_rhodes@earthlink.net), May 10, 2002."
And you don't turn them in ? Are these the ones that abide by law or is this something totaly different ? Was the AOC once 10 or 12 in the history of the United States ? I want to see how well you know your stuff.
-- Tony (awalker@teknett.com), May 10, 2002.
TonyYour quote:
"we are the complete opposite of Republicans, Democrats and Authortarians."
Who is the "WE" you are speaking of in the quote above? And furthermore You use the accronym "AOC". Which one is this? You should always write it out at all times to reduce confusion. To use Accronyms alone is not proper writing skill and is also a lack of respect of others who have not a clue of what you are referring to. This accronym stands for many things and being used alone neans absolutely nothing to the reader.
-- Fred Bishop (fcbishop@globaleyes.net), May 10, 2002.
We as in Libertarians, I don't care about my writing skills, you show the same lack of respect as anyone else or me for that matter.
-- Tony (awalker@teknett.com), May 10, 2002.
TonyYour illiterate writing skills only proves to your lack of compassion and knowledge. AGAIN, I ask what DOES AOC mean?
Thsi is a Catholic forum and I don't have to repeat this again. The Commandment is Thou Shall Not Kill. All of the bibles I have here specifically say that. YOU are clearly wrong. So stop refuting the word of GOD and his style of writing.
-- Fred Bishop (fcbishop@globaleyes.net), May 10, 2002.
AOC is (I think) age of consent. Tony wants to "solve" our problems by getting rid of statutory rape protections. I still have yet to see "logical" Dennis raise an eyebrow at such a ridiculous proposal. I guess he doesn't want to offend his main supporter on the forum! LOL...I wonder if Dennis is a Libertarian, too.Enjoy,
Mateo
-- (MattElFeo@netscape.net), May 10, 2002.
MateoI went into the web and typed in AOC and lo and behold it stands for several hundred titles. That is why Acronyms are totally useless alone.
I retired from a company which lived heavily on Acronyms for decades. Western Electric/AT&T/Lucent Technologies. It gave me daily headaches as most of the engineers and other authors continually never wrote it out on the first time it was uased in their reports. A bad writing habit. Blessings.
-- Fred Bishop (fcbishop@globaleyes.net), May 10, 2002.
AOC is short for Age of Consent, we should all be aware what it stands for by now, expectly during the church scandials.
-- Tony (awalker@teknett.com), May 10, 2002.
"AOC is (I think) age of consent. Tony wants to "solve" our problems by getting rid of statutory rape protections. I still have yet to see "logical" Dennis raise an eyebrow at such a ridiculous proposal. I guess he doesn't want to offend his main supporter on the forum! LOL...I wonder if Dennis is a Libertarian, too. Enjoy,Mateo
-- (MattElFeo@netscape.net), May 10, 2002."
You correct, I want to save the church :)
-- Tony (awalker@teknett.com), May 10, 2002.
TonyReally, Are you aware the Group called 'NAMBLA' (North America Man/Boy Love Association) also wants to eliminate the Age Of Consent (AOC) so they can have sex freely with young boys without any legal harrassment whatever. I think you really need to reconsider this thought of yours. Are you revealing yourself to us?
The Age Of Consent (AOC)laws were written to protect those who would be vulnerable to others who would prey on them.
-- Fred Bishop (fcbishop@globaleyes.net), May 10, 2002.
"Really, Are you aware the Group called 'NAMBLA' (North America Man/Boy Love Association) also wants to eliminate the Age Of Consent (AOC) so they can have sex freely with young boys without any legal harrassment whatever. I think you really need to reconsider this thought of yours. Are you revealing yourself to us?The Age Of Consent (AOC)laws were written to protect those who would be vulnerable to others who would prey on them."
Yes, Fred I'm aware of NAMBLA/Freespirit/Danpedo and everyone else out there. I'm fully aware of why it was written in the first place, but it was never this high to begin with, it was raise do to fear and ignorants, you right that every society have there own AOC, but don't expect it to be over fourteen.
-- Tony (awalker@teknett.com), May 10, 2002.
It seems I wasn't being clear when I wrote:"Tony wants to "solve" our problems by getting rid of statutory rape protections."
"Our" doesn't refer to the Catholics. "Our" refers to all of us in society. Because over 99% of child abuse occurs by non-priests, I consider statutory rape a problem that all of society must confront. Tony, I don't know why you side with NABLA, but statutory rape laws are not and should not be removed from the books. These laws are here to stay...
Mateo
-- (MattElFeo@netscape.net), May 10, 2002.
Tony writes:"I'm fully aware of why it was written in the first place, but it was never this high to begin with, it was raise do to fear and ignorants,"
Boy, even Tony is following Joan's method of discrediting opposing viewpoints by claiming that they act on "fear and ignorance." Tony, these statutory rape laws were not created out of ignorance (or even ignorants).
Mateo
-- (MattElFeo@netscape.net), May 10, 2002.
"Boy, even Tony is following Joan's method of discrediting opposing viewpoints by claiming that they act on "fear and ignorance." Tony, these statutory rape laws were not created out of ignorance (or even ignorants).Mateo"
I didn't say created, I said raised, at least I think I did.
-- Tony (awalker@teknett.com), May 10, 2002.
"Our" doesn't refer to the Catholics. "Our" refers to all of us in society. Because over 99% of child abuse occurs by non-priests, I consider statutory rape a problem that all of society must confront"Sure, I would like to help your society, but I rather focus on my society. "I consider statutory rape a problem that all of society must confront" Nope, can't be done, try as you may, but it will always remain a problem in your society, you can build the country with prisions, won't change a thing. I rather view it as a sexiality then a disease simply because it can't be cure, either that the AOC is way to high, what about lowering it to 12 ?
-- Tony (awalker@teknett.com), May 10, 2002.
TONYYou sir are a complete nincompoop and a jerk with absolutely no morals at all. WE as Catholics do not care for your lawlessness and total disregard for common sense and decency. it is ingrained in us by Christ to be morally responsible and that is it. You are the worst of evil I have ever seen. BUG OFF.
-- Fred Bishop (fcbishop@globaleyes.net), May 10, 2002.
Tony writes:"I didn't say created, I said raised, at least I think I did."
Laws were created.
Tony writes:
"Sure, I would like to help your society, but I rather focus on my society."
I think I asked this of you before: what planet are you from?
Mateo
-- (MattElFeo@netscape.net), May 10, 2002.
I'm on the same one you on, I just refuse to except our society, since that is a term used to perverse the lives of others.
-- Tony (awalker@teknett.com), May 10, 2002.
"You sir are a complete nincompoop and a jerk with absolutely no morals at all."Thankyou
-- Tony (awalker@teknett.com), May 10, 2002.
Please contibute your 2 penny at http://greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=00945kGod Bless
-- Xavier David (xavier_david24@yahoo.com), May 12, 2002.
No history lesson here.....You are all missing the point ..including Tony the Actor ..there are Catholic priests that are married allowed by Canon law. The world has more then just Roman catholics ..there are other parts of the catholic church that are in full communion with Rome and are allowed to be married such as the Oriental catholic church and others...People evolve ..the Church is people...you see the conclusion
-- Michael Sword (bugaboo@reach.net), May 20, 2002.
MichaelYou are totally out of your world. That is your bag of rubbish. The MAJORITY of priests in the Catholic Church are Celebate and unmarried. End of discussion.
-- Fred Bishop (FCB@heartland.com), May 20, 2002.
Fred you obviously have not studied canon law so I will not waste time with you. I am not stating an opinion here, go to the Vaticans home page yourself and read the Canon law regarding married priests and the reichs that are allowed to be married. You are an arrogant fool who should study the Church you so call profess.
-- Michael Sword (bugaboo@reach.net), May 25, 2002.
After writing the last statement, I had a vision, fred would not be enlightened enough to find this info so here is a quick history . Please go to this link which is non partial as is from the dean of Notre Dame , a priest of course who buts the history better then I can. http://www.catholicherald.com/saunders/02ws/ws020425.htmAnd Freedy my boy still not good enough , like I said before go to the Vaticans own home site and do your searching www.vatican.va/ . Or even simplier ask a priest who is true ..imagine that ,,talk to one lately? Oh by the way you are the 23 rd part of 24 . That is the Catholic Church!
-- Michael Sword (bugaboo@reach.net), May 25, 2002.
MichaelI really don't care about the old history. It is today's requirements that matters. Celibacy is the desired mode and that is all I need to know.
-- Fred Bishop (FCB@heartland.com), May 25, 2002.
Fred, that I respect, was just proofing that it is not my bag of rubbish.God Bless
-- Michael Sword (bugaboo@reach.net), May 26, 2002.