I just read that the Omaha Archdiocese has asked that religious institutions be exempt from a proposed law in Omaha to combat discrimination based on sexual orientation. So they're basically saying it's not ok for other places to discriminate but they can? I am really getting fed up.
So female grill cookers...what shall we name our "no so hot spot" on the grill? (Tom mentioned below that in the industry they call it the Cameron Diaz spot)
Karl Rove spot? Wait, I had an English teacher who suggested jestingly that maybe one of Dante's circles of hell would be a good place for him, so that's pretty hot. How about David Arquette?
To be fair to the Archdiocese, it's not illegal to have a relationship with an 18-year-old, but the Church would still consider that an exploitative, unequal relationship and would move quickly on a priest who initiated such a relationship and they don't want such a priest to be able to sue them for discrimination, or worse yet, to be legally forced to leave such a priest in charge of children or teens. Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to deceive.
Hi, I've been having computer problems. In fact, AT&T has sent me a replacement modem which I have not installed yet. I hope to get to it today. A couple hours ago I responded to the story about the Omaha archdioce and sexual orientation and it was a rather lengthy response and just in the instant that I tried to publish it I lost internet access and what I typed got erased. I'll try again because I believe that what I wrote is important. First, everyone should realize that the secular press will use half truths to attack the Church or put it in a bad light. The stories they report generally do not tell the whole story but only those parts of the story that cast the Church in a bad light. Reporting that the Omaha archdiocese wants to be exempt from some regulations regarding sexual orientation is one such example. What the secular press does not tell you is this: In many parts of the country the civil authorities have attempted to force the Church to do things which violate moral principles to which the Church adheres. Perhaps the best example occurred recently in the archdiocese of Boston. For many decades the archdiocese has provided adoption services. One diocesan regulation is that the adoptive parents must be a man and a woman. The civic authorities held that this amounted to discrimination based on sexual orientation and decreed that the archdioce must change its regulation. The archdiocese refused to back down from the moral principal involved and finally decided that it had no choice so it no longer provides adoption services even though historically it probably processed more adoptions than any other agency in Massachusetts. A similar thing happened in a city (I forget which) in the southwest. There the civic authorities declared that it is against the law for a hospital to deny abortions to any woman. The local bishop decided to close the hospital rather than compromise the moral principal. I am not certain what the issue was in Omaha but I would not be surprised if the archbishop knows what a tremendous job Catholic Charities does in providing adoption services there and is trying to avoid what happened in Boston. A related problem is one faced by many doctors, nurses and pharmacists who refuse to participate in an abortion. Much of the pro-abortion legislation does not include a conscience clause which would allow those people to refuse to participate in an abortion even though, in many cases, their professional careers are on the line. We have to remember that the Catholic Church is just about the only minority left in this country that can be attacked with impunity. Commentators and comedians relate stories and tell "jokes" about the Church that they would not dare to tell about other groups and, as I wrote earlier, use of half-truths gives credence to what is essentially a lie. I think it is important for all of us to read our diocesan newspapers so that we get more factual information about some of these divisive issues. Also, we must remember that the Church does not comdemn homosexuals, only homosexual activities. Another thing we must remember is that Jesus left his apostles with the responsibility "to teach all nations." The bishops, as successors of the apostles have inherited that responsibility. There was a recent complaint about the bishops in Minnesota mailing out information germane to the coming election. I happen to know that the money to pay for that mailing came from a private donation and it was not paid for by diocesan funds. But even if it had been paid for by the dioceses, so what? It's the responsibility of the bishops to keep Catholics informed about the moral principles to which the church adheres, whether those principles are popular or not. I mean, that's what Jesus told them to do.
Hi, I've been having computer problems. In fact, AT&T has sent me a replacement modem which I have not installed yet. I hope to get to it today. A couple hours ago I responded to the story about the Omaha archdioce and sexual orientation and it was a rather lengthy response and just in the instant that I tried to publish it I lost internet access and what I typed got erased. I'll try again because I believe that what I wrote is important. First, everyone should realize that the secular press will use half truths to attack the Church or put it in a bad light. The stories they report generally do not tell the whole story but only those parts of the story that cast the Church in a bad light. Reporting that the Omaha archdiocese wants to be exempt from some regulations regarding sexual orientation is one such example. What the secular press does not tell you is this: In many parts of the country the civil authorities have attempted to force the Church to do things which violate moral principles to which the Church adheres. Perhaps the best example occurred recently in the archdiocese of Boston. For many decades the archdiocese has provided adoption services. One diocesan regulation is that the adoptive parents must be a man and a woman. The civic authorities held that this amounted to discrimination based on sexual orientation and decreed that the archdioce must change its regulation. The archdiocese refused to back down from the moral principal involved and finally decided that it had no choice so it no longer provides adoption services even though historically it probably processed more adoptions than any other agency in Massachusetts. A similar thing happened in a city (I forget which) in the southwest. There the civic authorities declared that it is against the law for a hospital to deny abortions to any woman. The local bishop decided to close the hospital rather than compromise the moral principal. I am not certain what the issue was in Omaha but I would not be surprised if the archbishop knows what a tremendous job Catholic Charities does in providing adoption services there and is trying to avoid what happened in Boston. A related problem is one faced by many doctors, nurses and pharmacists who refuse to participate in an abortion. Much of the pro-abortion legislation does not include a conscience clause which would allow those people to refuse to participate in an abortion even though, in many cases, their professional careers are on the line. We have to remember that the Catholic Church is just about the only minority left in this country that can be attacked with impunity. Commentators and comedians relate stories and tell "jokes" about the Church that they would not dare to tell about other groups and, as I wrote earlier, use of half-truths gives credence to what is essentially a lie. I think it is important for all of us to read our diocesan newspapers so that we get more factual information about some of these divisive issues. Also, we must remember that the Church does not comdemn homosexuals, only homosexual activities. Another thing we must remember is that Jesus left his apostles with the responsibility "to teach all nations." The bishops, as successors of the apostles have inherited that responsibility. There was a recent complaint about the bishops in Minnesota mailing out information germane to the coming election. I happen to know that the money to pay for that mailing came from a private donation and it was not paid for by diocesan funds. But even if it had been paid for by the dioceses, so what? It's the responsibility of the bishops to keep Catholics informed about the moral principles to which the church adheres, whether those principles are popular or not. I mean, that's what Jesus told them to do.
I'll be brief. I know the Catholic church does many great things. That's why I send Jude to Catholic school. But I have to say their attitude toward homosexuals makes it difficult for me to support them. I think it's a shame that many kids who need loving homes will continue to live in foster care or in institutions. I thinks it's silly that the church will now accept the fact that God made homosexuals but the church condemns homosexual activities. It's as nonsensical as when Madeline Albright (whom i really like) said that "we're not calling it genocide but acts of genocide are taking place," in reference to Rwanda. About the stupid video, where ever the money came from I guess isn't the real issue. It just makes me feel like, "OK, you don't like gays. We get it. DO you have to ram it down our throat with a video.?" One gay catholic interviewed in an article I read said she felt like the church was making gays feel like the bogey man. I can't blame her.
I'll wait for someone to point out the flaws in my logic.
And now I need to go finish my presentation on the gardens of chaucer. I don't know how I got this assignment. I have no horticultural talent and cannot tell a heliotrope from a lupine. And I hate middle english.
The situation in Omaha is a proposal before the City Council by Councilman Ben Gray...there are other city laws that the Omaha Church is already "immune" from, such as they can't be sued for not hiring a non-Catholic, or for firing someone if they find their religious beliefs differ those of the Church. So, it's not uncommon for the Church to make such a proposal. The St.Pius/St.Leo School had at least 3 lesbians teaching there when my kids were there, and there was some speculation about the Principal at the time. Everyone knew it and in fact one of them received a Diocesan award.
I think things are changing slowly for homosexuals. Personally, I think they should be allowed to marry and adopt.
Bishops do have an obligation to teach, like the Apostles...but the Apostles were hand picked by Jesus, and were fishermen and common workers...our Bishops are charismatic types who rise to the top many times because of that charisma...they are certainly not all inspired... I think I would rather have Apostle Peter over for dinner than some Bishops.
Is anyone from CB/Omaha interested in this...I think I'm going.
Gaelic Storm at the Slowdown in Omaha on Wed. Oct.27 at 8:30 tix are $22.
They've had 7 albums on Billboard's chart toppers, you may have seen them in the movie "Titanic" the Irish band who played in the bowels of the boat and made everyone happy for awhile! Please Come!!!
Emily-the flaw is that we're talking about an adoption service provided by the archdiocese. If the archdiocese will only process adoptions to heteros, that does not mean they are preventing homosexuals from adopting. Homosexuals can adopt through one of the many other agencies. I honestly don't see the problem, especially when the public good that results from the many successful adotions they place surely outweighs whatever bad results from the policy.
Besides, there's a paucity of information which would fill out the extent to which the policy actually imacts the ability of homosexuals to adopt. Do agencies contact one another the way car dealers do when a buyer wants a spcific model and another dealer might have it? Does the archdioceses lock down on their supply of adoptees or is an infant they know of available for placement by another agency?
If you really want to make the process totally proper, adoptive parents shouldn't be able to prefer one type of child over another. You get the next kid available, whether black or white or disabled or siamese.
Speaking of which I've seen shows about kids joined at the head or whatever but never three kids joined together (except that old Popeye cartoon where he's on an island and a three headed goon is one of his adversaries).
Ok. So the kids the archdiocese represents can go to heteros. I am sure you are right that there is no shortage of couples wanting kids. But still I think the church's treatment of homosexuals is gaybashing. And young homosexuals being bullied to the point of suicide not being able to find respite in the church not Christlike.
Overwhelmingly the Church is a force for good over evil. Evil is real. It impacts us more or less everyday. Always, usually without our awareness, our souls are under seige. Evil wants in so it can putrify what was once a pristine soul. The problem is evil will present itself in innocouos ways. Under the guise of science, educated rationalities, unqualified tolerance or any number of entities or personalities.
Perhaps the Church is imperfect. It's history will tell us this is the case. No one can say that it's policies during the Middle Ages were purely Christianlike - evil had entered deep into it's hierarchy. Because of the heroic efforts and examples set for by Saints and more common catholics Good gained an upper hand and returned it to a greater force for God's intentions.
As the battle continues the Church becomes more akin to perfect. It's policies strive to do what is right and good. But, because of human frailties and imperfections it can seem off course for some.
The important thing to remember is the community of the church and it's legions of well intentioned prayers are the pure essence of human Good.
Do not get hung up on one issue that you see as an injustice. The Church is on a path to perfection. It will waver and stumble at times due to the ebb and flow of the battle. But it is striving for what is right. In it's efforts it is doing much good.
The whole condones homosexuals but not homosexual activities seems so, so, so silly. It seems like some in-church political policy handed down from long ago so when rich and influential men did have gay relationships, they would just have to ask for forgiveness and be "off the hook." Can someone please explain the reasoning behind this? Does the church acknowledge that people are born gay? But I do think a church is a church and should be able to make its own decisions on who to hire, care for, and marry. If they are charitable to everyone, then they can also benefit from government grants and resources. If they are discriminatory, they can be self sufficient.
We will be tailgating for the game but not going in. We will also be trick or treating, fire pitting, and eating at our place after. Anyone who needs a place to stay is welcome. We will have plenty of (floor) space.
The Church, despite denying itself the wisdom and experience of half its members at the highest levels of moral and theological teaching authority, has mostly gotten it right but is still a growing and imperfect institution. When it allies itself with political power it mostly gets it wrong. When it allies itself with the weak and powerless it mostly gets it right. It seems to me that it used to have a much more lively and diverse theological and moral discourse at earlier times in its history than it does now. Since the Reformation it sort of locked down and declared all dissent off limits. I have to point out here that the formal doctrine of papal infallibility was promulgated by a pope, and fairly late in the Church's history. The black-or-white doctrine and moral teaching we are familiar with is a fairly recent characteristic (I believe). The thing to remember is that we are still in process. We are still developing. What we are familiar with is just a blip in the history of trying to bring about the Kingdom of God on earth. We have a duty to speak out when we perceive injustice in the Church, because we ARE the Church, but we should also try to understand the basis for the Church's teachings. At this point in my life I wouldn't leave the Church because of what I think are wrong teachings any more than I would leave the United States if it involved itself in an immoral and corrupt war. I feel a duty to stay and try to right the course (with all due humility). The difference between ours and earlier generations is that the possibility isn't beyond consideration. Thanks to the principle of the separation of Church and State, there is little risk of being burned at the stake (political commercial).
Well, Gilligan will be an Ewok and Curly Girl will be a lifeguard...wearing a bikini with 3 tops strung across her 3 rows of teats. I'm going as Homorphous.
RE: Juan Williams firing. Totally stupid shouldn't have happened based what we saw and what he said.
But, I find this website kind of funny and cool. BC of course, if I were on a plane, I'd be afraid of the Muslims who were NOT identifying themselves by their wardrobe. I did find his fear kind of stupid.
We just put a bunch in chili. And just got some chipolte bbq sauce- make some of your own! Why do you have so much? And why don't you tell us about Betty's birthday?
For me, the surprisingly good isu game made up for the surprisingly bad ND game. Even more excited for tailgating next week, with fans still on a big win high. Hopefully we will get another win, then pull off a second surprise win over Nebraska. I'm dreaming big here.
Chipotles - I like to put them in a blender and use the paste as an ingredient in just about anyting. Put them in any sauce, dressing or condiment. They are powerful so use them carefully. I over used them in chili once and it just didn't taste right. The chipotles are smoked so sometimes that flavor will come to the fore when you don't want it to.
Juan Williams - a classic case of uberliberal righteousness run amuck. Just another reason I can't stand uberliberalism. All rationality gets tossed out the window. The hag that fired him should get fired herself. It's gonna cost NPR a lot of money.
57 comments:
Happy Birthday, Betty! Whatcha gonna do for it?
Have a great birthday Betty. That's a fabulous photo.
p
Happy Birthday Betty! Have fun.
Monica
Happy Birthday, Betty! You look great.
Happy Birthday Betty!!
It seems all those veggies you love have given you great hair, teeth and skin!! And a happy smile.
Happy Birthday, Betty. You look marvelous.
http://wherebadmovieslive.wordpress.com/2010/10/12/power-is-fleeting-love-is-eternal-review-of-krull/
Josh wrote a funny review of the movie Krull at the above web address.
He also has a new short story just published in the journal WaterStone Review.
P
I just read that the Omaha Archdiocese has asked that religious institutions be exempt from a proposed law in Omaha to combat discrimination based on sexual orientation. So they're basically saying it's not ok for other places to discriminate but they can? I am really getting fed up.
I think they're just saying that "don't ask, don't tell" has been working fine...haha
So female grill cookers...what shall we name our "no so hot spot" on the grill? (Tom mentioned below that in the industry they call it the Cameron Diaz spot)
I nominate the "Christian Bale Spot". Any others?
Ben Affleck spot.
Monica
Matthew Mcconnaughey
p
Tom Selleck spot.
Mel Gibson spot.
Karl Rove spot? Wait, I had an English teacher who suggested jestingly that maybe one of Dante's circles of hell would be a good place for him, so that's pretty hot. How about David Arquette?
To be fair to the Archdiocese, it's not illegal to have a relationship with an 18-year-old, but the Church would still consider that an exploitative, unequal relationship and would move quickly on a priest who initiated such a relationship and they don't want such a priest to be able to sue them for discrimination, or worse yet, to be legally forced to leave such a priest in charge of children or teens. Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to deceive.
Hi, I've been having computer problems. In fact, AT&T has sent me a replacement modem which I have not installed yet. I hope to get to it today. A couple hours ago I responded to the story about the Omaha archdioce and sexual orientation and it was a rather lengthy response and just in the instant that I tried to publish it I lost internet access and what I typed got erased. I'll try again because I believe that what I wrote is important.
First, everyone should realize that the secular press will use half truths to attack the Church or put it in a bad light. The stories they report generally do not tell the whole story but only those parts of the story that cast the Church in a bad light. Reporting that the Omaha archdiocese wants to be exempt from some regulations regarding sexual orientation is one such example. What the secular press does not tell you is this: In many parts of the country the civil authorities have attempted to force the Church to do things which violate moral principles to which the Church adheres.
Perhaps the best example occurred recently in the archdiocese of Boston. For many decades the archdiocese has provided adoption services. One diocesan regulation is that the adoptive parents must be a man and a woman. The civic authorities held that this amounted to discrimination based on sexual orientation and decreed that the archdioce must change its regulation. The archdiocese refused to back down from the moral principal involved and finally decided that it had no choice so it no longer provides adoption services even though historically it probably processed more adoptions than any other agency in Massachusetts.
A similar thing happened in a city (I forget which) in the southwest. There the civic authorities declared that it is against the law for a hospital to deny abortions to any woman. The local bishop decided to close the hospital rather than compromise the moral principal.
I am not certain what the issue was in Omaha but I would not be surprised if the archbishop knows what a tremendous job Catholic Charities does in providing adoption services there and is trying to avoid what happened in Boston.
A related problem is one faced by many doctors, nurses and pharmacists who refuse to participate in an abortion. Much of the pro-abortion legislation does not include a conscience clause which would allow those people to refuse to participate in an abortion even though, in many cases, their professional careers are on the line.
We have to remember that the Catholic Church is just about the only minority left in this country that can be attacked with impunity. Commentators and comedians relate stories and tell "jokes" about the Church that they would not dare to tell about other groups and, as I wrote earlier, use of half-truths gives credence to what is essentially a lie.
I think it is important for all of us to read our diocesan newspapers so that we get more factual information about some of these divisive issues. Also, we must remember that the Church does not comdemn homosexuals, only homosexual activities.
Another thing we must remember is that Jesus left his apostles with the responsibility "to teach all nations." The bishops, as successors of the apostles have inherited that responsibility. There was a recent complaint about the bishops in Minnesota mailing out information germane to the coming election. I happen to know that the money to pay for that mailing came from a private donation and it was not paid for by diocesan funds. But even if it had been paid for by the dioceses, so what? It's the responsibility of the bishops to keep Catholics informed about the moral principles to which the church adheres, whether those principles are popular or not. I mean, that's what Jesus told them to do.
With love, Dad
Hi, I've been having computer problems. In fact, AT&T has sent me a replacement modem which I have not installed yet. I hope to get to it today. A couple hours ago I responded to the story about the Omaha archdioce and sexual orientation and it was a rather lengthy response and just in the instant that I tried to publish it I lost internet access and what I typed got erased. I'll try again because I believe that what I wrote is important.
First, everyone should realize that the secular press will use half truths to attack the Church or put it in a bad light. The stories they report generally do not tell the whole story but only those parts of the story that cast the Church in a bad light. Reporting that the Omaha archdiocese wants to be exempt from some regulations regarding sexual orientation is one such example. What the secular press does not tell you is this: In many parts of the country the civil authorities have attempted to force the Church to do things which violate moral principles to which the Church adheres.
Perhaps the best example occurred recently in the archdiocese of Boston. For many decades the archdiocese has provided adoption services. One diocesan regulation is that the adoptive parents must be a man and a woman. The civic authorities held that this amounted to discrimination based on sexual orientation and decreed that the archdioce must change its regulation. The archdiocese refused to back down from the moral principal involved and finally decided that it had no choice so it no longer provides adoption services even though historically it probably processed more adoptions than any other agency in Massachusetts.
A similar thing happened in a city (I forget which) in the southwest. There the civic authorities declared that it is against the law for a hospital to deny abortions to any woman. The local bishop decided to close the hospital rather than compromise the moral principal.
I am not certain what the issue was in Omaha but I would not be surprised if the archbishop knows what a tremendous job Catholic Charities does in providing adoption services there and is trying to avoid what happened in Boston.
A related problem is one faced by many doctors, nurses and pharmacists who refuse to participate in an abortion. Much of the pro-abortion legislation does not include a conscience clause which would allow those people to refuse to participate in an abortion even though, in many cases, their professional careers are on the line.
We have to remember that the Catholic Church is just about the only minority left in this country that can be attacked with impunity. Commentators and comedians relate stories and tell "jokes" about the Church that they would not dare to tell about other groups and, as I wrote earlier, use of half-truths gives credence to what is essentially a lie.
I think it is important for all of us to read our diocesan newspapers so that we get more factual information about some of these divisive issues. Also, we must remember that the Church does not comdemn homosexuals, only homosexual activities.
Another thing we must remember is that Jesus left his apostles with the responsibility "to teach all nations." The bishops, as successors of the apostles have inherited that responsibility. There was a recent complaint about the bishops in Minnesota mailing out information germane to the coming election. I happen to know that the money to pay for that mailing came from a private donation and it was not paid for by diocesan funds. But even if it had been paid for by the dioceses, so what? It's the responsibility of the bishops to keep Catholics informed about the moral principles to which the church adheres, whether those principles are popular or not. I mean, that's what Jesus told them to do.
With love, Dad
That WAS worth saying twice, Dad.
Happy Birthday Betty.
Tom
I'll be brief. I know the Catholic church does many great things. That's why I send Jude to Catholic school. But I have to say their attitude toward homosexuals makes it difficult for me to support them. I think it's a shame that many kids who need loving homes will continue to live in foster care or in institutions. I thinks it's silly that the church will now accept the fact that God made homosexuals but the church condemns homosexual activities. It's as nonsensical as when Madeline Albright (whom i really like) said that "we're not calling it genocide but acts of genocide are taking place," in reference to Rwanda. About the stupid video, where ever the money came from I guess isn't the real issue. It just makes me feel like, "OK, you don't like gays. We get it. DO you have to ram it down our throat with a video.?" One gay catholic interviewed in an article I read said she felt like the church was making gays feel like the bogey man. I can't blame her.
I'll wait for someone to point out the flaws in my logic.
Basically, my opinion is that the church's doctine toward gays is very unChristlike. That's just my opinion.
Em,
I agree.
And now I need to go finish my presentation on the gardens of chaucer. I don't know how I got this assignment. I have no horticultural talent and cannot tell a heliotrope from a lupine. And I hate middle english.
p
The situation in Omaha is a proposal before the City Council by Councilman Ben Gray...there are other city laws that the Omaha Church is already "immune" from, such as they can't be sued for not hiring a non-Catholic, or for firing someone if they find their religious beliefs differ those of the Church. So, it's not uncommon for the Church to make such a proposal.
The St.Pius/St.Leo School had at least 3 lesbians teaching there when my kids were there, and there was some speculation about the Principal at the time. Everyone knew it and in fact one of them received a Diocesan award.
I think things are changing slowly for homosexuals. Personally, I think they should be allowed to marry and adopt.
Bishops do have an obligation to teach, like the Apostles...but the Apostles were hand picked by Jesus, and were fishermen and common workers...our Bishops are charismatic types who rise to the top many times because of that charisma...they are certainly not all inspired... I think I would rather have Apostle Peter over for dinner than some Bishops.
Who all is going to the Iowa State game on the 30th?
We might.
Is anyone from CB/Omaha interested in this...I think I'm going.
Gaelic Storm at the Slowdown in Omaha on Wed. Oct.27 at 8:30 tix are $22.
They've had 7 albums on Billboard's chart toppers, you may have seen them in the movie "Titanic" the Irish band who played in the bowels of the boat and made everyone happy for awhile!
Please Come!!!
i'm planning on going but hadn't heard anything yet...
to the game that is, not the Irish band.
Emily-the flaw is that we're talking about an adoption service provided by the archdiocese. If the archdiocese will only process adoptions to heteros, that does not mean they are preventing homosexuals from adopting. Homosexuals can adopt through one of the many other agencies. I honestly don't see the problem, especially when the public good that results from the many successful adotions they place surely outweighs whatever bad results from the policy.
Besides, there's a paucity of information which would fill out the extent to which the policy actually imacts the ability of homosexuals to adopt. Do agencies contact one another the way car dealers do when a buyer wants a spcific model and another dealer might have it? Does the archdioceses lock down on their supply of adoptees or is an infant they know of available for placement by another agency?
If you really want to make the process totally proper, adoptive parents shouldn't be able to prefer one type of child over another. You get the next kid available, whether black or white or disabled or siamese.
Well, if it's siamese you get the next two.
Speaking of which I've seen shows about kids joined at the head or whatever but never three kids joined together (except that old Popeye cartoon where he's on an island and a three headed goon is one of his adversaries).
Ok. So the kids the archdiocese represents can go to heteros. I am sure you are right that there is no shortage of couples wanting kids. But still I think the church's treatment of homosexuals is gaybashing. And young homosexuals being bullied to the point of suicide not being able to find respite in the church not Christlike.
And they're called conjoined.
Are they conjoined when there's 3 of 'em? I thought that was only 2. Prolly wrong. I'm trying to work the word "tri-taters" in here somehow.
Overwhelmingly the Church is a force for good over evil. Evil is real. It impacts us more or less everyday. Always, usually without our awareness, our souls are under seige. Evil wants in so it can putrify what was once a pristine soul. The problem is evil will present itself in innocouos ways. Under the guise of science, educated rationalities, unqualified tolerance or any number of entities or personalities.
Perhaps the Church is imperfect. It's history will tell us this is the case. No one can say that it's policies during the Middle Ages were purely Christianlike - evil had entered deep into it's hierarchy. Because of the heroic efforts and examples set for by Saints and more common catholics Good gained an upper hand and returned it to a greater force for God's intentions.
As the battle continues the Church becomes more akin to perfect. It's policies strive to do what is right and good. But, because of human frailties and imperfections it can seem off course for some.
The important thing to remember is the community of the church and it's legions of well intentioned prayers are the pure essence of human Good.
Do not get hung up on one issue that you see as an injustice. The Church is on a path to perfection. It will waver and stumble at times due to the ebb and flow of the battle. But it is striving for what is right. In it's efforts it is doing much good.
That's my dime store theology.
Tom
My pristine soul is under siege by the Devil and Skeletor.
a theological question-Emily-does the Church "accept the fact that God made homosexuals"?
For the record, I think the Church has condemned and tried to mitigate every occurrence of genocide since I've paid attention.
The whole condones homosexuals but not homosexual activities seems so, so, so silly. It seems like some in-church political policy handed down from long ago so when rich and influential men did have gay relationships, they would just have to ask for forgiveness and be "off the hook." Can someone please explain the reasoning behind this? Does the church acknowledge that people are born gay?
But I do think a church is a church and should be able to make its own decisions on who to hire, care for, and marry. If they are charitable to everyone, then they can also benefit from government grants and resources. If they are discriminatory, they can be self sufficient.
We will be tailgating for the game but not going in. We will also be trick or treating, fire pitting, and eating at our place after. Anyone who needs a place to stay is welcome. We will have plenty of (floor) space.
The Church, despite denying itself the wisdom and experience of half its members at the highest levels of moral and theological teaching authority, has mostly gotten it right but is still a growing and imperfect institution. When it allies itself with political power it mostly gets it wrong. When it allies itself with the weak and powerless it mostly gets it right. It seems to me that it used to have a much more lively and diverse theological and moral discourse at earlier times in its history than it does now. Since the Reformation it sort of locked down and declared all dissent off limits. I have to point out here that the formal doctrine of papal infallibility was promulgated by a pope, and fairly late in the Church's history. The black-or-white doctrine and moral teaching we are familiar with is a fairly recent characteristic (I believe). The thing to remember is that we are still in process. We are still developing. What we are familiar with is just a blip in the history of trying to bring about the Kingdom of God on earth. We have a duty to speak out when we perceive injustice in the Church, because we ARE the Church, but we should also try to understand the basis for the Church's teachings. At this point in my life I wouldn't leave the Church because of what I think are wrong teachings any more than I would leave the United States if it involved itself in an immoral and corrupt war. I feel a duty to stay and try to right the course (with all due humility). The difference between ours and earlier generations is that the possibility isn't beyond consideration. Thanks to the principle of the separation of Church and State, there is little risk of being burned at the stake (political commercial).
I got burned at a Church poker night once.
Where the stakes high?
Tom
Nothing worse than burned stakes...
I thought I had made up a great new word (homorphous) but I googled it and it's used in Harry Potter.
So what are people dressing as for Halloween?
Well, Gilligan will be an Ewok and Curly Girl will be a lifeguard...wearing a bikini with 3 tops strung across her 3 rows of teats.
I'm going as Homorphous.
I bet Brianne's going as Branstache.
We're going tailgating/firepitting/trick-or-treating and I can't wait!
RE: Juan Williams firing. Totally stupid shouldn't have happened based what we saw and what he said.
But, I find this website kind of funny and cool. BC of course, if I were on a plane, I'd be afraid of the Muslims who were NOT identifying themselves by their wardrobe. I did find his fear kind of stupid.
http://muslimswearingthings.tumblr.com/
P
I mean, if I were nervous at all, which I'm not. Too many other things to kill me, like I95.
dayne crist is against homophobia...
http://www.towleroad.com/2010/08/notre-dame-quarterback-dayne-crist-against-homophobia.html
Hey Tom-I've got a buncha little cans of chipotle peppers in adobo sauce. What do I do with them?
I use those in lots of things. Like, I chop them up when I grill burgers.
I know, this was addressed to Tom, but I don't care. I'm a fan of chipotle peppers.
P
We just put a bunch in chili. And just got some chipolte bbq sauce- make some of your own! Why do you have so much? And why don't you tell us about Betty's birthday?
For me, the surprisingly good isu game made up for the surprisingly bad ND game. Even more excited for tailgating next week, with fans still on a big win high. Hopefully we will get another win, then pull off a second surprise win over Nebraska. I'm dreaming big here.
Traded for them with a Mexican dude for a healthy white baby. Gave him an IOU.
Betty had a great birthday, tho it's not finished. She's doing a limo with a buncha friends this weekend. Then a movie.
How come a limo? Doesn't she get a permit now? Dad
How come a limo? Doesn't she get a permit now? Dad
Jude bought a new Boba Fett with his first tooth fairy money and Finn took his first steps today. Fun day.
Chipotles - I like to put them in a blender and use the paste as an ingredient in just about anyting. Put them in any sauce, dressing or condiment. They are powerful so use them carefully. I over used them in chili once and it just didn't taste right. The chipotles are smoked so sometimes that flavor will come to the fore when you don't want it to.
Juan Williams - a classic case of uberliberal righteousness run amuck. Just another reason I can't stand uberliberalism. All rationality gets tossed out the window. The hag that fired him should get fired herself. It's gonna cost NPR a lot of money.
Tom
So, then, what was the Shirley Sherrod situation? Uberconservatives? I think it's more just the tenor of politics right now. Stupid.
P
Sherrod's situation was completely different. The whole thing was a set up. Based solely on what was initially released she should have been fired.
But as it turns out it was just another case of being Hoodwinked or Bamboozled by The Man.
Tom
Post a Comment