Cardinal Pell video

[Sena]

This video proves that the Roman Catholic Church is rubbish:



In another case, an Indian nun accuses a bishop of rape:

[jbseth]

Hi Sena,

I think its very possible that what we're seeing today, is the last generation where the Catholic Church will be a religious/financial/political force in the world. It truly seems to be imploding upon itself.

Furthermore, as I understand it, the young people today aren't really going to any of the Christian churches in any sort of large numbers. I think that perhaps they're all in trouble.

I suspect that perhaps within the next 30 to 50 years, as a result of this generation that's growing up now, the Catholic Church and many other Christian churches will gradually die out do to a severe lack of attendance and financial support.

jbseth








 

[Sena]

I think its very possible that what we're seeing today, is the last generation where the Catholic Church will be a religious/financial/political force in the world.

jbseth, sadly, I am not sure that will happen. My understanding is that the RC Church is growing in Africa. I live in a Catholic area of Sri Lanka, and there is no evidence that the Church is weakening. The marketing skills of the Church have been developed over 2000 years. Even in the USA, isn't it the case that financial contributions to the Church are tax-exempt? There being a shortage of priests in America, Sri Lankan and African priests go and work there, earn money, and bring the money back to their native countries.

http://www.sundaytimes.lk/110814/News/nws_18.html

https://www.courant.com/news/connecticut/hc-news-accused-priests-hartford-archdiocese-20190122-dm2jfdtkzncwtcpuz46ciry4ia-story.html

When will Trump add Catholic priests to the category of prohibited immigrants?

[jbseth]

Hi Sena,

I hear what you're saying, maybe it's just wishful thinking on my part, but there are many surveys that say that all churches are losing their membership.

As far a Trump goes, he mostly only seems to be interested in blocking the poor people from Central America, South America and many of those Arab countries from entering America.  On just about everything else, whatever he says he supports today, he seems to say something else entirely different tomorrow.

I'm not sure I'd count on him.

jbseth

 

[Sena]

I hear what you're saying, maybe it's just wishful thinking on my part, but there are many surveys that say that all churches are losing their membership.

jbseth, people with any degree of consciousness will stay away from churches. Those who continue going to church are those who, in Gurdjieff's terminology, are "asleep".

[LarryH]

Even in the USA, isn't it the case that financial contributions to the Church are tax-exempt?

Donations to charities including religious organizations qualify as tax deductions, but with current tax laws, most people get no benefit from this. Religious organizations themselves pay no income tax in the US.

[Sena]

Larry, thanks for clarifying that.

[Deb]

As far as I'm concerned, the Catholic church has been a problem since day one. I could say Christianity in general. All the deaths, stealing of valuables, torture... crimes committed "in the name of the Lord." And I've been hearing again in the news how the Vatican helped Nazi war criminals escape. The sexual abuse stories are never ending and I'm glad the corruption and coverups are finally coming out into the open.

While it seems to me Seth's prophecy that religion will end up in shambles, it also seems that only Catholicism at this point is imploding.

As far as churches losing their membership: I live in the suburbs near Denver, and churches continue to be built, almost right on top of each other. All Christian and including meeting rooms, schools, etc. The trend over the past decade or two has been to build massive churches that can hold thousands of worshippers. They have things going on Wednesdays, Saturday and Sunday worship. There are so many people attending that the parking lots overflow and they need police to supervise the logjams caused by their exodus.

So to me, it seems like Christianity more popular than ever. Which I don't understand. Catholicism is a small part of all of this. The popular version of Christianity these days is nondenominational, but with more "born agains" in my particular neighborhood. Churches continue to do very well financially, they apparently get loads of donations.

When my son was born 24 years ago we joined a small Catholic church in order to have him baptized, just to get the relatives off our backs. The church sent us a letter that we were expected to give them a certain amount of money every week (tithe) (it almost seems like we signed paperwork). To add more pressure, we were sent envelopes with our names/address printed on them and a box to fill in the dollar amount enclosed in the envelope so they could keep track of donations. I seem to recall the church used to send out a newsletter with how much people had donated, but maybe I'm imagining that. Of course during services they also run the donation baskets on a long broom handle down the pews a couple of times to shame people into giving even more money.

[Sena]

When my son was born 24 years ago we joined a small Catholic church in order to have him baptized, just to get the relatives off our backs. The church sent us a letter that we were expected to give them a certain amount of money every week (tithe) (it almost seems like we signed paperwork).

Deb, this is one of the reasons for the "success" of the RC Church - They are not ashamed to ask for money. But their policies are completely irrational for the 21st century. Recently they had a big meeting at the Vatican to discuss the child sex abuse problem, but absolutely nothing came of it. Priestly celibacy is the main cause of the problem, but the institution seems unable to tackle it. All they have to do is to say that Jesus did not command priestly celibacy, but then the question is why did they make a totem of it for 20 centuries?

[Deb]

All they have to do is to say that Jesus did not command priestly celibacy, but then the question is why did they make a totem of it for 20 centuries?

I've never thought to look into why the insistence on celibacy in the Catholic  church, but now I'm curious. As a kid I just accepted it as law. Once a nun told me that she was essentially married to Christ, wedding ring and all, and to be intimate with anyone would be committing adultery. So are priests et al also married to Christ? Wouldn't that be homosexuality?

I had a neighbor who went to a BA Christian church here. They would regularly bash homosexuals and other "crimes" against God. Then the minister (who was married and had a family), got caught soliciting sex from a male prostitute in an infamous part of Denver and my neighbor found a new church. Interestingly, her favorite son (she had two) came out of the closet a couple of years later. Within a year after that, she withered away and died of an undiagnosed ailment.

Do you suppose Paul was the one to initiate celibacy? It seems like he was a strange one. It's also odd to me that the church would attract so many pedophiles. I don't understand why a man who has strong enough religious beliefs to join the clergy in order to be an authority on what it takes to be a good Christian would also decide it's ok for him to molest children. How twisted and corrupt. With a nod to mass events and how/why this drama exists in our world.

Are pedophiles made? Or born that way?

[jbseth]

Hi Deb, Hi All,

Prior to really digging into biblical historical scholarship, there was a lot of what was written in both the Old Testament and the New Testament that I really didn't understand. Then I discovered the books of Bart Ehrman. Bart is a biblical historical scholar who seems to write with much clarity in his explanations. For me, he's the kind of like the "Seth" of historical scholars.

While I can't say for certain exactly why the RC Church opted for the specific celibacy policy that it chose for itself, if I had to guess, I'd say that it probably comes from Paul's epistle, 1 Corinthians.

This epistle, is a letter that Paul wrote to one of his churches, the Corinthian church, which was really messed up. In Chapter 5 of this epistle, we find that one of the church members was having an affair with his father's wife. I don't believe that this was incest however, because it wasn't addressed as a man having an affair with his mother.

Not only was Paul upset about this, because this was considered to be adultery, but he was also upset by the fact that other church members appeared to be Ok with it.  In the last 10 verses or so of 1 Corinthians, Chapter 6, Paul seems to go on a rant about this situation and then in the first 2 verses of Chapter 7 he says the following:


1 Now concerning the things whereof ye wrote unto me: It is good for a man not to touch a woman.

2 Nevertheless, to avoid fornication, let every man have his own wife, and let every woman have her own husband.


There is much about the RC Church, its history and policies that I don't know or understand.  However, I believe that the RC Church probably holds a belief that God inspired Paul to write 1 Corinthians.  Along these same lines, I also believe that the RC Church also holds a belief that verse 1, and not verse 2, is what God really wants his people to do. Thus, I think that this, at least, is part of the basis for their celibacy policy.

Personally, I think that when Paul wrote verse 1, he knew that there would be problems if anyone ever tried to enforce this concept, and that's why he also wrote verse 2. 

Thus, from a RC Church standpoint, given that God inspired Paul to write 1 Corinthians, then it's reasonable to conclude that God inspired Paul to write verse 2 as well.

Thus, it seems to me that if the RC Church really wanted to, they could easily justify changing this policy, and let "every" man have his own wife, and let "every" woman have her own husband, as Paul wrote in verse 2.

Given this then and given all of their sexual abuse problems, I personally don't understand why they seem to have so much difficulty in opting to make this change.

jbseth.

[jbseth]

Hi Deb, Hi All,

As to your question on pedophiles, I don't know if anyone really knows the answer for sure.

I suspect that for some, part of this may have come from the severe physical, sexual and mental abuse that they were exposed to while growing up.

This, no doubt gives them an extremely messed up understanding of emotions, feeling and behaviors and how to correctly and effectively deal with them.

jbseth.

[Sena]

I've never thought to look into why the insistence on celibacy in the Catholic  church, but now I'm curious.

Deb, this is the million dollar question. Jeffrey Kripal has an interesting theory. Kripal was actually in a seminary for several years training to be an RC priest. While there he underwent psychoanalysis from a priest who was a trained analyst. As a result of the analysis Kripal realized that he was heterosexual while most of the other students were repressed homosexuals. Kripal then left the seminary.
So Kripal's theory is that the celibate priesthood mainly attracts homosexuals. Many priests repress their homosexuality, but sometimes it comes out as in the case of Cardinal Pell with the choirboys. There is an article by Kripal here:

http://www.crosscurrents.org/Kripal0304.htm

This is a quote: "I came to a remarkably similar conclusion in the seminary. It was as if "being called" (the literal meaning of a "vocation") to the priesthood was more or less synonymous with "being gay." No one, of course, put it that way, and most Catholic leaders would certainly passionately deny this, but this is precisely the effect the church's celibate all-male institutional structure and condemnation of homosexuality have on its ranks."

Please note that I am not being homophobic here. I have nothing against homosexuals who don't try to pretend that they are celibate saints.

Do you suppose Paul was the one to initiate celibacy?

Paul may well have been the culprit. He wrote in one of his epistles: "It is better not to touch a woman". No prohibition on touching boys. He also wrote that he had "a thorn in the flesh".

https://qspirit.net/apostle-paul-homosexuality/

[Sena]

In the last 10 verses or so of 1 Corinthians, Chapter 6, Paul seems to go on a rant about this situation and then in the first 2 verses of Chapter 7 he says the following:


1 Now concerning the things whereof ye wrote unto me: It is good for a man not to touch a woman.

2 Nevertheless, to avoid fornication, let every man have his own wife, and let every woman have her own husband.

jbseth, thanks for finding the exact text. It would seem that Paul did not insist on priestly celibacy. At that time there were probably no Catholic priests as such.

[jbseth]

Hi Sena,

Yeah, I don't think that the RC Church existed during Paul's life.

Furthermore, I suspect that it didn't actually start to even become an organization until sometime after the early church fathers like Clement, Ignatius and Polycarp, see link below.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Church_Fathers


Bart Ehrman, a biblical historian, believes that Paul was actually an apocalyptic teacher.  That is, Bart thinks that Paul believed that Jesus was going to come again, the second coming, very soon, probably during Paul's lifetime.  From this perspective, it appears that Paul wasn't really trying to set up a church. Instead he was trying to get the message of Jesus and his pending return out into the world at large, so people could get prepared and start performing the "right" actions, and just as importantly, stop performing the "wrong" actions.

From Bart's perspective, it wasn't until sometime later, when the second coming still hadn't occurred and the people of Paul's generation started to die off, that the early Christians started to form an actual organization that became the early "Christian" church. 

In addition to this, given the writings of early Christian leaders like Origen and others, I think that it was actually perhaps several hundred years after Jesus, before this early "Christian" Church started to look something like the RC Church of today.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origen


It seems to me that Bart's theory about Paul is entirely plausible. 


jbseth.

[Deb]

Just to liven things up, I thought I'd share these articles.  Interesting timing. And amusing.

https://www.rt.com/news/448528-duterte-gay-catholic-bishops/ "Most of them are gay... They should come out in the open, cancel celibacy and allow them to have boyfriends." and "The Holy See had functioned just fine for over one thousand years before the Church adopted a policy of clerical celibacy at the Second Lateran Council in 1139."

https://www.rt.com/news/453490-duterte-penis-stupid-priests/

Second Lateran Council in 1139. A clue! The Second Council supposedly repeated the directive from the Second.

From the First Council of the Laterin in 1123:

CANON 21

Summary. Clerics in major orders may not marry, and marriages already contracted must be dissolved.

Text. We absolutely forbid priests, deacons, subdeacons, and monks to have concubines or to contract marriage. We decree in accordance with the definitions of the sacred canons, that marriages already contracted by such persons must be dissolved, and that the persons be condemned to do penance.

[Deb]

And some history: http://theconversation.com/how-did-celibacy-become-mandatory-for-priests-75031

[jbseth]

Hi Deb, Hi Sena, Hi All

Deb. Thanks for sharing those links.

I don't think I'd necessarily follow any of Rodrigo Duerte's advice. He seems to be somewhat of an extremist to me.

I really liked the link on celibacy.  It sounds like the RC Church has a long history of dealing with this issue and I agree with the authors thoughts on this, I don't expect them to necessarily change this any time soon even though they should have done so, a long time ago.


I really like Sena's post on Jeffrey Kripal. I think this man, Jeffrey, may really be on to something.

I don't know how times in my life I've heard stories of people, who were in denial of their LGBTQ (I hope I got that right) tendencies, who went so far as to marry someone from the opposite sex. To me, this always seems to be an extreme situation of denial. Then later, the person comes out, which often causes major problems in the family. The latest well known example of this being Bruce/Kaitlin Jenner.

Other scenarios I've heard about are the priests and ministers of various Christian churches, who are known to rage against homosexual activity. Then later, these same people are caught in the act of soliciting a member of the same sex for prostitution.

Often, it seems to me, that its the members of some organization, that rage the most against the gay community, who turn out to have gay tendencies themselves.


Please understand, I personally have absolutely nothing against anyone in the LGBTQ community. I fully support them, and their right to be themselves. 


jbseth 




 

[Sena]

That is, Bart thinks that Paul believed that Jesus was going to come again, the second coming, very soon, probably during Paul's lifetime.  From this perspective, it appears that Paul wasn't really trying to set up a church.

jbseth, yes it is clear that Christians in the first two centuries expected the world to end quite soon. The main Christian teachings were based on this prediction. The fact that the world did not end casts doubt on those teachings.
My father told me the story of a fellow University student during WWII who was having difficulty with his studies. This student was convinced that Hitler was in the process of developing the mother of all bombs, and this would put an end to his (the student's) problems.

[Sena]

Just to liven things up, I thought I'd share these articles.   Interesting timing. And amusing.

https://www.rt.com/news/448528-duterte-gay-catholic-bishops/ "Most of them are gay... They should come out in the open, cancel celibacy and allow them to have boyfriends." and "The Holy See had functioned just fine for over one thousand years before the Church adopted a policy of clerical celibacy at the Second Lateran Council in 1139."

Deb, I didn't like the Phillipine president, and I never watch the Russian TV channel, but this sounds good.

[Deb]

Often, it seems to me, that its the members of some organization, that rage the most against the gay community, who turn out to have gay tendencies themselves.

He doth protest too much? Lol. I have to agree.

I have a friend that only came out of the closet until his wife of about 30 years died of dementia (she was only 50). His older daughter was out of the house by then, the younger one at home, and I wondered how strange that would be for kids. He was always very involved in the church (Baptist maybe), even ran men's counseling groups. I had no clue, but he did confide in me at one time that he suffered anxiety attacks and I wonder if that's related. I can't imagine forcing yourself to play a(n important) role in life that's not you—and being so deeply involved in a religion that condemns your inner most personal tendencies.

As far as Duerte, he's a pig and no one would take his advice. But I thought it was amusing since we're on the topic of sex and the church.

Kripal: He's come up on the forum in the past. An interesting guy, had some intriguing interpretations on religion. Also seemed obsessed with seeing eroticism in everything. He was too extreme as far as I'm concerned, I only got so far in the book. He came up around here, but you've read all of that already.

Sena, I sometimes read articles on the rt.com website because (I feel) they sometimes give more balanced reports on American news and politics than I can get with American news. They will point out flaws on both sides of our rift, and to me that's refreshing. I also like to know what the rest of the world hears about what goes on here. I have friends in Austria and the American news (especially politics) is so filtered by the media that they have no clue.

[LenKop]

Pell was our Archbishop for a long while. (I'm from Melbourne, Australia).

There's a big uproar among Catholics here.

Nothing will change until it changes from within, and the only way that will happen is when the money runs out.

Parishes here are being combined. I thought it was due to lack of numbers, but my child's principal let me know it is due to a lack of priests. So maybe the celibacy issue might be squeezing the church after all.

South east Asia is a stronghold, though, and, having priests who are bilingual, they just send some from Vietnam or Philippines down under and it's business as usual.

I am surprised of the growth of alternative Christian churches here. Far more people are turning to them. They look like much more fun.

We debated sending our children to Catholic school, or public school. We opted for the former and we are happy we did.

The strange thing is on the ground there is a level of acceptance that seems to contradict Rome. In a group of books that some of the older children can read, there is a book written about children having same sex parents. Any religious denomination can join the school with no need to join in the sacraments, and a respect granted toward their chosen religion's practices.

Strange how the tentacles seem to be moving with the times, whereas the head is stuck up it's own arse...,.oops 

Len