Crafting The Schism

Ritual Whiplash...and Spiritual Concussion

2011-10-28T12:58:00.000-05:00

If you follow advertising at all you know that some campaigns work and some do not. When the Pepsi logo changed to its current version, test groups showed negative reaction. The same with several Tropicana campaigns. And more recently when Netflix announced it was splitting into two services, they lost over 500,000 customers in the weeks following (and their 3Q earnings took a huge hit) before they recanted and apologized for the very thought of the idea. Their mea culpa came too late, though.

The changes to the mass ritual will no doubt result in some interesting reactions. The headline should be changed to: Mindless Repetitious Prayer by Rote Changes...oh, the irony.

Recently, the Pope refused to pray with the heads of other faiths. Nothing says agenda-laden elitism like snubbing your frenemies. Oh, except the following change (particularly this one) to the mass: The line that said Jesus died on the cross “for you and for all so that sins may be forgiven” will change to “for you and for many for the forgiveness of sins.”

So, Jesus did not die for all? Really? Will they also change the part of the mass when the priest regards the Eucharist and says "He who takes away the sins of the world?"....or will it be changed to "He who takes away the sins of many."? This change helps to polarize, divide, and judge. It contradicts the following scriptural citations, which I find to be spiritually comforting. But I guess fear, not comfort, is what the Church is best at.

1 John 4:14 - And we have seen and do testify that the Father sent the Son to be the Savior of the world.

Rom 5:18 - Therefore as by the offense of one judgment (because of Adam) came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one (because of Jesus) the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life.

1 Timothy 2:1-4 - I exhort therefore, that, first of all, supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks, be made for all men; For kings, and for all that are in authority; that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty. For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Savior; Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth.

1 John 2:1-2 - My little children, these things write I unto you, that ye sin not. And if any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous: And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world.

1Timothy 4:10 - For therefore we both labor and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the Savior of all men, especially of those that believe.

SO, LET'S REVIEW:

1) God sent his Word to be the savior of the whole world.
2) In the same manner that judgment came upon all men due to one man Adam, so also the free gift came upon the same lot, all men.
3) God desires all men to be saved.
4) He sent his word to be a propitiation for the sins of the whole world, not just our own sins, and
5) Jesus is the savior of all men, especially (ie not exclusively, but especially) those that believe.

And the last sentence of the article, which tries to calm the fervor over the changes, is a quote by a reverend who tries to redirect what people should be concerned about in a Hey, look what's that over there? method. Smooth.So, while the Vatican Boys' Club decides to change things up, they tilt their hand as white-knuckling harder that elitism which they are desperate to sell to their tithers. The difference is that now it is actually said out loud. During mass.

I have the feeling that this might ALSO be an offensive play toward the growing number of believers like myself - Christian who believe that the all-encompassing, unspoiled-brat-like love of Christ WILL save everyone in the end and that the death of Christ was not to save a mere "many". That would mean the crucifixion was pretty much a failure. And this is the shortfall that the Catholic church will be reminding you of every week.

-------------------------------------------------------
Catholics’ Mass liturgy changing; ‘ritual whiplash’ ahead?

By Michelle Boorstein, Published: October 27, 2011 - Source Link

English-speaking Catholics are bracing for the biggest changes to their Mass since the 1960s, a shift some leaders warn could cause “ritual whiplash.”

The overhaul, which will become mandatory Nov. 27, is aimed at unifying the more than 1 billion Catholics worldwide with a translation that is as close as possible to the original Latin version. It allows for less independence and diversity of interpretation in a church that in recent decades has tried to retain more control over how Catholicism is defined.

Recent popes have emphasized orthodoxy and hierarchy, particularly in the West, where religious identity is increasingly fluid. Catholic hospitals and schools have been required to more clearly espouse church teachings, and Pope Benedict XVI has stressed the sole truth of Catholicism over other faiths, even declining this month to pray with Hindus, Jews and others at an interreligious event.

The new translation changes the majority of sentences in the Mass. The prayers and call-and-response dialogue between the priest and the congregation are different, transforming the dialogue that Catholics under 40 have used in church their entire lives. Some leaders warn that the shift could cause “ritual whiplash” among those accustomed to a worship script so familiar that most recite it from memory.

Reaction to the changes has been intense, in some ways fueling a Catholic culture war that began when the Second Vatican Council in the 1960s imposed far more sweeping changes designed to open up and modernize the church. Some traditionalists say the new translation of the ritual is richer and — because it’s less conversational — more mysterious and spiritual.

“At first I thought it was an affront, the Vatican coming down on us. But after thinking about it, I see it as something that will bring us all back toward the center,” said Emily Strand, 35, a former campus minister at the University of Dayton who has attended Mass regularly throughout her life. “Vatican II was an excuse for people to do whatever they wanted with the liturgy.”

But more modern Catholics, and some who are already disaffected, say the new language is an awkward imposition that will distance people from the church. The translation “wouldn’t affect me going [to church] or not,’’ said Vilma Linares, who was walking near St. Matthew’s Cathedral earlier this week with a friend at lunchtime. “But the less conversational the Mass, the more they will alienate people.”

Erie, Pa., bishop Donald Trautman says that such words as “consubstantial” and “chalice” and a Jesus “born ineffably of the inviolate Virgin” won’t help Catholics get closer to God.

“We have to keep in mind these are prayer texts being used by priests at a Mass,” he said. “People should be able to understand them when they are heard.”

Others, including clergy, have protested that the new translation replaces ones approved by the U.S. bishops.

Perhaps the most basic change will be when the priest says: “The Lord be with you.” The congregation will no longer say “And also with you.” The new response is “And with your spirit.”

Some changes are more controversial. The line that said Jesus died on the cross “for you and for all so that sins may be forgiven” will change to “for you and for many for the forgiveness of sins.”

Other changes emphasize the difference between common English and Latin: “When supper was ended, He took the cup” becomes: “In a similar way, when supper was ended, He took this precious chalice in His holy and venerable hands.”

A poll of Catholics done early this summer by the Center for Applied Research in the Apostolate showed that 77 percent of respondents were unaware of a forthcoming new translation. Catholic dioceses and schools began preparations a few months ago, running workshops and podcasts and updating Web sites to lay out what’s happening and why.

Millions of books are being replaced; each parish must buy its own. (What becomes of the old books? The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops recommends burying them on church grounds or in a parish cemetery.) While parishes wait for the new ones, laminated cards will be put in the pews as a guide for worshipers.

Still, church officials say they expect serious confusion when those Catholics who aren’t connected with Catholic institutions and attend church only on big holidays, show up for Christmas. The Rev. Michael Wilson of Our Lady Star of the Sea in Solomons, Md., said he will offer this advice next month to his congregants: “Okay, folks: Everyone take a deep breath.”

The new translation has been in the works since a decade ago, when Pope John Paul II called for a full replacement of the one that came out of the 1960s Second Vatican Council. The thinking that came out of Vatican II was that the Mass script should be contemporary and paraphrased, that people should pray the way they speak in regular life.

As a result, pivotal changes were made. Mass was no longer said in Latin, and priests began facing the congregation (instead of standing with their backs to the crowd) and preaching more about the Bible rather than only on church doctrine.

Traditionalists worried that having different translations around the world opened the door to confusion. The past decade has seen much debate in the church about the new translation, with the Vatican rejecting less-literal translations that some saw as more poetic and contemporary.

When asked this week about the issue, several priests repeated an inside joke: What’s the difference between a liturgist and a terrorist? You can negotiate with a terrorist.

Catholics who speak other languages are on a later schedule and won’t see any changes immediately. There is no timeline yet for Spanish-speaking Americans. But the English version is perhaps the most important to the Vatican, because booming areas in Asia, including China, use it, not the Latin one, as the basis of their translations.

Monsignor Andrew Wadsworth, executive director of the commission in charge of English translations of liturgy, said the reforms will promote unity. “The way we worship is what we believe,” he said. “If you want to have unity of belief, texts used in worship need to be the same.”

Several priests in the region said the controversy was being overblown.

“There are other things more important to focus on,” said the Rev. Gerry Creedon of Holy Family in Dale City, “like drone bombings.”

"Insurrection" by Peter Rollins

2011-10-21T14:29:00.000-05:00

Ok, the following description and reviews are taken directly from Amazon.com's listing for this book, but I'm pretty stoked to get my hands on a copy of Peter Rollins' book Insurrection - found here on Amazon.

In this incendiary new work, the controversial author and speaker Peter Rollins proclaims that the Christian faith is not primarily concerned with questions regarding life after death but with the possibility of life before death.

In order to unearth this truth, Rollins prescribes a radical and wholesale critique of contemporary Christianity that he calls pyro-theology. It is only as we submit our spiritual practices, religious rituals, and dogmatic affirmations to the flames of fearless interrogation that we come into contact with the reality that Christianity is in the business of transforming our world rather than offering a way of interpreting or escaping it. Belief in the Resurrection means but one thing: Participation in an Insurrection.

Reviews:

"What does it mean when the Son of God cries out, 'My God, My God, why have you forsaken me?' Brilliantly, candidly, and faithfully, Rollins wrestles here with that question. You may not agree with his answers and conclusions, but you owe it to yourself and to the church at large to read what he says.

—Phyllis Tickle, author, The Great Emergence

"Peter Rollins is the Anti-Christ for all fake Christians."

--Creston Davis, Professor, Rollins College, Department of Philosophy and Religion
"What Pete does in this book is take you to the edge of a cliff where you can see how high you are and how far you would fall if you lost your footing. And just when most writers would kindly pull you back from edge, he pushes you off, and you find yourself without any solid footing, disoriented, and in a bit of a panic…until you realize that your fall is in fact, a form of flying. And it's thrilling."

--Rob Bell, author of Love Wins and Velvet Elvis

"While others labor to save the Church as they know it, Peter Rollins takes an ax to the roots of the tree. Those who have enjoyed its shade will want to stop him, but his strokes are so clean and true that his motive soon becomes clear: this man trusts the way of death and resurrection so much that he has become fearless of religion."

--Barbara Brown Taylor, author of Leaving Church and An Altar in the World

“Rollins writes and thinks like a new Bonhoeffer, crucifying the trappings of religion in order to lay bare a radical, religionless and insurrectional Christianity. A brilliant new voice—an activist, a storyteller and a theologian all in one—and not a moment too soon.”

--John D. Caputo, Thomas J. Watson Professor of Religion Emeritus, Syracuse University

“What does it mean when the Son of God cries out, ‘My God, My God, why have you forsaken me’? Brilliantly, candidly, and faithfully, Rollins wrestles here with that question. You may not agree with his answers and conclusions, but you owe it to yourself and to the Church at large to read what he says.”

--Phyllis Tickle, author, The Great Emergence

"Excellent thinking and excellent writing! I hope this fine book receives the broad reading it deserves. It will change lives, and our understanding of what religion is all about!"

-- Rohr,O.F.M., Center for Action and Contemplation; Albuquerque, New Mexico

Checking In & A Friendly Reminder

2011-10-12T15:45:00.001-05:00

Life has gotten busy and I'm hoping for a renewal of time to be able to read and write on spirituality soon. I just wanted to check in and remind readers of this truth:

Unconditional love means you do not need to do anything to earn it. Not even believe in it.

I believe God is unconditional love. So that whole thing about believing in God in order to be 'saved'...yeah, I don't buy it.

I think as far as The Good Book goes, thinking believers should to take a closer look at its interpretations and the origins of those interpretations with reference to the suspiciously unChrist-like texts citing the heavenly privilege of elitist believers. That passage needs to be reviewed within the context of the political, and social upheaval of the time in which it was written. That is something few pastors or priests will expound upon.

Shame of the Emerald Isle

2011-07-13T14:31:00.000-05:00

One word: Unacceptable.

------------------------------

Irish Catholic Church concealed child abuse in 1990s

Reuters - By Conor Humphries | Reuters – July 13, 2011

Original Source Link

DUBLIN (Reuters) - A government-sponsored report said on Wednesday the hierarchy of the Catholic Church in Ireland continued to conceal the sexual abuse of children by priests even after it introduced rules in the mid-1990s to protect minors.

Revelations of rape and beatings by members of religious orders and the priesthood in the past have shattered the dominant role of the Catholic Church in Ireland.

But the latest report into the handling of sex abuse claims in the diocese of Cloyne, in County Cork, shows that senior-ranking clergy were still trying to cover up abuse allegations almost until the present day.

"This is not a catalog of failure from a different era. This is not about an Ireland of 50 years ago. This is about Ireland now," Minister for Children Frances Fitzgerald told a news conference.

The report, which focuses on 19 priests who allegedly abused children during a period from January 1996 to February 2009, lists how the diocese failed to report all sexual abuse complaints to the police and did not report any complaints to the health authorities between 1996 and 2008.

The bishop formerly responsible for the diocese, John Magee, falsely told the authorities that he was reporting all abuse allegations to the police, the report said.

He resigned in March last year after a Church investigation said his handling of abuse allegations had exposed children to risk.

Magee issued an apology to victims on Wednesday for his failure to report abuse and said he hoped the report would "provide the new beginning that we all had hoped for in 1996."

The government is to submit legislation to parliament that could jail clerics for up to five years if they fail to report to the authorities information about abuse of children, Justice Minister Alan Shatter said.

VATICAN 'ENTIRELY UNHELPFUL'

The report also criticized the Vatican as "entirely unhelpful" by describing Irish church guidelines on how to deal with abuse accusations as "merely a study document."

"The church guidelines weren't applied and it is quite clear also that the Vatican were complicit in that," Shatter said. The government will decide soon whether to summon the papal nuncio, the pope's representative in Ireland, over the matter, he said.

"It just goes to show we cannot trust the words of the Church and that is a very sad thing to say," said Maeve Lewis, head of abuse survivor group One in Four.

"I don't believe for one minute that Cloyne is a rogue diocese, different from the others."
The report said that the Church's own guidelines would have protected children had they been implemented. Complainants' pain was compounded by the fact that their abusers appeared to have suffered no sanctions after the abuse had been revealed.

One accusation of abuse against a girl aged nine was dismissed by investigators as mere "over familiarity" despite the fact that the priest in question had admitted fondling girls in the past.

Another priest was ordained against the advice of a psychologist who found evidence of "deep sexual repression" and evidence of psychosis. No reports were made to the police despite complaints by three young men who said the priest got them drunk and abused them.

"Without exception, (victims) felt that they had been let down by the institutional Church," the report said.

"They were all of the opinion that in their meetings with higher Church officials, the sole concern was the protection of the institution rather than the wellbeing of children."

One priest even officiated at the wedding of one of his victims, the report said.

The report is the fourth by a government commission in Ireland. A 2009 report on widespread child abuse by priests in the Dublin archdiocese between 1975 and 2004 said the Church in Ireland had "obsessively" concealed the abuse.

The head of the Catholic Church in Ireland Cardinal Sean Brady issued an apology to express his "shame and sorrow" at what happened.

The release of the report marked "another dark day" for the Catholic church in Ireland, he said.

(Editing by Carmel Crimmins and Jon Boyle)
(Reporting by Conor Humphries; Editing by Jon Boyle)

Get a Load of This

2011-06-21T09:57:00.000-05:00

Here's an old school Sunday School book. All I can say is WOW.

Photo from this source: http://lockerz.com/s/112472344

Ex-Priest Crusades for Abuse Victims

2011-06-20T13:14:00.000-05:00

A telling experience from another former Catholic.

----------------------------------------
One time priest crusades for abuse victims suing Catholic Church
By Richard Allen Greene, CNN
June 20, 2011

(CNN) - As a young man studying for the priesthood, Patrick Wall imagined life as a professor and football coach at a Catholic university. It didn't work out that way. Two decades later, Wall has not only left the Catholic Church, he has become one of its most tireless opponents. He's an ex-priest, driven from ministry by the feeling that his superiors used him to help cover up sex abuse by other clergymen. And he's using the training he gained as a priest to work with victims of abuse who want to take the church to court.

Since 1991, Wall says he has consulted on more than 1,000 abuse cases, helping lawyers pick apart defenses mounted by dioceses from Alaska to Australia. Now a senior consultant at the law firm of Manly and Stewart in Southern California, Wall spoke to CNN on the sidelines of a recent conference for legal and religion scholars at Cardiff Law School in Wales.

In Philadelphia, where four priests and a Catholic school teacher were indicted on sex abuse charges earlier this year, Wall says he is helping the district attorney build an unprecedented criminal case not only against the clergy, but against an archdiocesan official who supervised them. The priests – one of whom is the church official – and the teacher have denied the allegations.

The case is potentially historic. Wall doesn't know of another case where a U.S. prosecutor has gone after an official at the top of the church hierarchy as well as the suspected abusers themselves.

Prosecutors are trying to convict a vicar – the man who supervised the priests in the archdiocese – with child endangerment because they say he allowed suspected abusers to have contact with young people. The case raises the possibility that a high-ranking church official will end up behind bars. Wall hopes the threat of prison time will change the way American bishops respond to abuse allegations in a way that civil lawsuits have not.

"In the civil cases, we have taken over $3 billion, but you're not getting a lot of change in the system," he says. Patrick Wall outside a recent conference in Wales.

There has been more than a decade of intense focus on abuse by priests across the United States and Western Europe, plus lawsuits, investigations, and Vatican statements, including instructions to bishops around the world just last month to come up with an abuse policy. And even so, Wall says, priests are still abusing children.

"I'm working on stuff that happened in the summer of 2010," he says. "It's the same old sodomy."

A life-changing assignment

Wall was studying to be a priest at Saint John's Abbey in Collegeville, Minnesota, when there was a life-changing knock on his door one morning after breakfast.

At his door that day in 1990 was the head of the abbey, Abbot Jerome Theisen, with an assignment, Wall says.

Wall, then 25, was to move into one of the freshman dormitories at the university associated with the abbey. The abbot wanted him to become a faculty resident, a staff position that involved keeping an eye on first-year university students in college housing. He was to make the move immediately, that very morning.

Wall knew why.

"Starting in 1989, we started getting hit with lawsuit after lawsuit" from people alleging that priests had abused them, Wall says. He says the abbot told him that credible abuse accusations had been made against the man Wall was to replace.

Brother Paul Richards, a spokesman for Saint John's Abbey, said that the monastery and university had no record of why Wall was asked to work in the dorm. Abbot Theisen has died, Richards added.

Saint John's Abbey adopted a policy on sexual abuse and exploitation in 1989, it says on its website, saying that made it “among the first institutions to adopt” such a policy.

Wall, for his part, says the abbot's request put him on the road to becoming what the church unofficially calls a "fixer," a person who parachutes in to replace clergy who have to disappear quickly and quietly.

Wall as the temporary administrator at a Maplewood, Minnesota church in 1995.

One of Theisen's successors, Abbot John Klassen, issued an open letter of apology in 2002, saying that "some members" of the monastic community had engaged in "abusive sexual behavior with people in our schools and parishes."

A lawsuit was filed earlier this month against Saint John's by a man who says he was abused in the 1960s by a priest who later served as abbot between Theisen and Klassen. The abbey says it was “shocked” by the charges against the late Abbot Timothy Kelly, who died of cancer last year.

It says it is investigating the claims against Kelly, calling them “the first allegations that Abbot Kelly violated his vows or was an abuser.”

Wall plans to testify in that case, he told CNN.

"In the fall of '92 we had another 13 [abuse] cases come through," Wall says. "They pushed up my ordination" by a few months, Wall says, so he could step into the shoes of another priest who had to vanish.

Understanding the damage

It was after his ordination, Wall says, that he began to understand the trauma that abusive priests were inflicting, not only on their victims but on victims' families and communities.

As a new priest, Wall started hearing confessions of victims' relatives who blamed themselves for the abuse, telling Wall "I should have known, I should have seen the signs."

A heavy-set man who laughs easily, Wall still looks like the linebacker he was in high school and college. He peppers his speech with words like "dude" and casually refers to people who he thinks have done something stupid as "morons."

But relating the confessions of victims' relatives, Wall's cheerful demeanor hardens.

"I'm telling them, 'You haven't committed a sin,'" he says.

Wall, right, with his mom, dad and a diocesan priest in 1989.

Wall says that child abuse isn't like other injury cases, such as car crashes, in which a victim might be 10% at fault. Instead, he says, "100% of the blame is on the perpetrator."

Over the next four years, Wall says that the Archdiocese of Saint Paul and Minneapolis sent him to four more places in Minnesota where priests needed to move out fast.

He learned a lot. Wall says he saw that there was a budget for handling cases of priestly sexual abuse as far back as 1994, eight years before the scandal blew up nationally with revelations about abuse in Boston, Massachusetts. The archdiocese could not immediately confirm that, but spokesman Dennis McGrath said he would not be surprised if it was true, saying the archdiocese had been a leader in helping victims of abuse.

Wall did what the church told him to do for as long as he could, he says, but his doubts continued to grow.

"I followed the party line," he says. "But it's pretty hard to follow the party line when you don't think the party line is moral any more."

The breaking point came in 1997. Wall was in Rome, studying for a master's of divinity degree. His abbot called from Minnesota to tell him he was being posted to the Bahamas.

It was not the dream job it might sound like.

Wall says that the Bahamas was where Saint John's was sending priests it had to keep away from people because of abuse allegations. Richards, the abbey's spokesman, flatly denies the charge.

"I basically was going to be a prison warden," Wall says.

"Without much planning, I said, 'Basta cosi,'" he says, lapsing into Minnesota-accented Italian meaning, "Enough of this." Wall had decided to leave the priesthood.

Patrick Wall at his first mass as a priest in December 1992.

The abbot did not take that well, Wall says, warning that he would never make it in "the real world," that he would not be released from his priestly vows and that the order would bill him for the master's degree it had sponsored for him. The tab for the degree was about $48,000, he says.

Richards denies those allegations. "It has never been the abbey's practice to require payback for education from members of our community who have left," he says, "and it was not the case with Pat Wall."

Wall says the abbot's threats did not change his mind.

"All it did is piss me off even more," he says. "I left without a plan in December 1997."

Insider knowledge

Wall says he went home to Lake City, Minnesota to live with his parents, then bounced from job to job for nearly five years. He got married and had a daughter. He made good money as a salesman in Southern California but says he found the work as intellectually stimulating as "shovelling dirt."

And then, in 2002, the California state legislature did something that would change Wall's life. The state opened a one-year window to allow victims of clergy abuse to sue the church, even if the if the statute of limitations on the case had already expired.

Wall's eyes light up as he discusses the moment.

The law did not specifically target the Catholic Church, Wall says, noting that some rabbis were sued as well. But Catholic organizations were by far the largest group of defendants.

Still, suing a Catholic diocese was no easy task. "The litigation demanded a level of expertise that had never been needed before," Wall says.

Because of his religious training in canon law, as the Catholic Church's rules are known, Wall had that expertise. He knew how and where the church kept records. He knew where money came from and where it went. He spoke Italian and Latin.

In his first case, he testified against the Roman Catholic Diocese of Orange, California, challenging its claim that it did not know the Franciscan friar at the center of abuse allegations.

Wall insisted that the archdiocese and any priest in it would have easy access to church records saying who the Franciscan was and who had jurisdiction over him.

The case settled out of court, Wall says.

The Diocese of Orange declined to comment for this article, as did the Archdiocese of Los Angeles, which is the defendant in several cases currently involving Wall’s firm, Manly and Stewart.

Jeffrey Lena, a lawyer who represents the Vatican in the United States, also declined to comment.

But Jeff Anderson, a Minnesota-based lawyer who specializes in suing the Catholic Church on behalf of abuse victims and filed the suit against Saint John's Abbey, is full of praise for Wall.

Anderson calls Wall “an extraordinary researcher, academic and hands-on voice of experience from the inside.”

He praises the former priest's “courage,” and says he is a “powerful, insightful source of information based on his own personal experience and his study of the phenomenon” of abuse.

An old problem

Wall argues that the problem of abuse by priests is far older than anyone in the church admits publicly.

The earliest church records concerning sexual misconduct by priests come from the Council of Elvira, he says. That synod took place in what is now Spain in the year 309.

There was a treatment center for abusive priests in Hartford, Connecticut, as far back as 1822, Wall says, and the Vatican issued instructions to American bishops on how to judge and punish accusations of criminal acts by priests as far back as 1883.

Wall provided his translation of the 1883 instructions to CNN. They do not refer to any specific crimes, but refer to “abuses” and “evils.” They set out how to investigate, judge and punish crimes by priests, laying out rules such as the examination of witnesses in private, and the opportunity for the accused to know the charges and to respond and appeal.

The Philadelphia district attorney's office declined to comment on assistance it is receiving from Wall, saying it was prevented by court order from discussing the case with the media.

But Wall says that years of seeing how the Catholic Church handles abuse cases have convinced him that the church will not solve the problem itself.

He says he's not impressed by new instructions from Rome last month giving bishops around the world a year to come up with procedures for handling allegations of abuse.

"It's a Circular Letter," he says, using the official church term for the document. "That means it's for the circular file. Bishops are going to throw it away."

Last week, the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops revised its 2002 charter around dealing with sex abuse allegations to reflect the Vatican's new standards.

Wall believes the Catholic Church will survive this scandal.

"It's going to fix itself," he says.

"The institution is going to become radically smaller" as people abandon the church, he predicts. "The loss of membership, the problems in the criminal courts, the statements from the pope - these are all good."

Perpetrators need "access, power and money" in order to commit crimes and get away with them, Wall argues. A smaller, weaker Catholic Church won't be able to provide those things, making it less of a haven for abusers, he says, which will lead to a cleansed institution.

In the meantime, Wall says, the church should give up trying to handle abusers internally and let the law step in.

He recommends that the church "completely get out" of child protection, hand over all its files to civil law enforcement, and make bishops sign a legal oath every year that there are no perpetrators in the ministry - which would open them to criminal prosecution if they are found to have lied.

"Otherwise," he says, "I'll be prosecuting priest sex abuse cases for the rest of my life."

Priest Sex-Abuse Case Hits Church of Pope's Adviser

2011-05-26T12:41:00.000-05:00

Notice that in the course of this article, the victims are not even addressed by the Church. It is the "great pain in seeing a priest who is not faithful to his vocation."

All things done in secret will come to light. This reads like a movie script in the sense that I cannot fathom the predatory evil. These are the most dispicable acts that could be perpetrated by such a person in power and trust upon innocents...and in the alleged service of God. Hypocrisy of this scale has never been so outrageous and cummulatively damaging. Faith and God has nothing to do with the Church anymore, it seems.

I was speaking with a friend about this article and he pointed out that one of these days a dad will take vengeance on his child's predator, and that predator will be a priest. I'm actually surprised this has not happened more often.

The AntiChrist works from within the flock, that's for damn sure. And there are so many of them in all tiers of the Catholic Church. Too bad morality in the "church government" cannot be federally regulated, eh? Lots of Madoffs would surface there, too.

---------------------------------------------
Priest Sex-Abuse Case Hits Church of Pope's Adviser

Thursday, May. 19, 2011 - Original Source

By Alessandra Pieracci and Giacomo Galeazzi / La Stampa / Worldcrunch

This post is in partnership with Worldcrunch, a new global news site that translates stories of note in foreign languages into English. The article below was originally published in the leading Italian daily La Stampa.

(GENOA) — The latest sex-abuse case to rock the Catholic Church is unfolding in the archdiocese of an influential Italian Cardinal who has been working with Pope Benedict XVI on reforms to respond to prior scandals of pedophile priests.

Father Riccardo Seppia, a 51-year-old parish priest in the village of Sastri Ponente, near Genoa, was arrested last Friday, May 13, on pedophilia and drug charges. Investigators say that in tapped mobile-phone conversations, Seppia asked a Moroccan drug dealer to arrange sexual encounters with young and vulnerable boys. "I do not want 16-year-old boys but younger. Fourteen-year-olds are O.K. Look for needy boys who have family issues," he allegedly said. Genoa Archbishop Angelo Bagnasco, who is the head of the Italian Bishops Conference, had been working with Benedict to establish a tough new worldwide policy, released this week, on how bishops should handle accusations of priestly sex abuse. (Read "Vatican Gets Tough on Child Abuse but Not Tough Enough.)

Bagnasco said that when he met the Pope this weekend, he "asked for a particular blessing for my archdiocese" in light of the alleged crimes, adding that "like every father toward a son [feels] great pain in seeing a priest who is not faithful to his vocation."

Vatican spokesman Father Federico Lombardi praised Bagnasco's handling of the Sastri Ponente case, lauding its "timeliness and competence." On Saturday, May 14, the Cardinal visited the Santo Spirito church, where Seppia was the parish priest.

According to investigators, Seppia told a friend — a former seminarian and barman who is currently under investigation — that the town's malls were the best places to entice minors. In tapped phone conversations the two cursed and swore against God. The priest is charged with having attempted to kiss and touch an underage altar boy and of having exchanged cocaine for sexual intercourse with boys over 18. (See inside Benedict XVI's daily life.)

Seppia's defense lawyers are expected to argue that those conversations — monitored since Oct. 20, 2010 — were just words, sex games that were played by adults. It was just a game even when he claimed to have "kissed on the mouth" a 15-year-old altar boy, according to the defense.

On Monday, May 16, during formal questioning by Genoa's investigating magistrate Annalisa Giacalone, Seppia chose not to respond. The magistrate decided to keep him in custody to avoid a risk of relapse or tampering with evidence. Defense attorney Paolo Bonanni said the defense wants to evaluate all the charges, reserving the right to respond to public prosecutor Stefano Puppo in the coming days.

Questioned by the investigators, the altar boy reportedly confirmed the attempted kiss. Another male minor who, according to the investigators, was stalked with messages and pressing invitations, will be questioned soon. Psychologists are helping Carabinieri police officers obtain testimony from the alleged victims. "The boys are ashamed to talk and to admit what happened," says one of the investigators. The evidence amounts to at least 50 messages and phone calls. In the tapped phone conversations, the drug dealer contacted the boys and gave their phone numbers to the priest, who paid them with cocaine or 50 euros each time for sexual intercourse. (Read "Controversial Study Links Catholic Abuse to '60s Culture and Church Hierarchy but Offers Few Solutions.")

"[The investigators] made us listen to that man saying terrifying things about our children. Things so terrible that I cannot repeat them," a father of one of the boys said.

Investigators are also examining three confiscated computers: the priest allegedly looked for partners via chat as well.

Seppia is currently being kept in a confinement cell in a Genoa prison. He met the jail's priest and psychologist. "He has read the newspapers, and he is pained by his parishioners' comments," says his lawyer. The investigation is ongoing.

Post Rapture Levity

2011-05-24T13:25:00.002-05:00

So, here we are and the "Rapture" has come and gone. How am I ever to survive in this post-apocalyptic world?
= )

Here is a little levity from Martin Zender, whom I am connected with on Facebook. He is very funny in his portrayal of God.

Here, he talks about Rob Bell's book, Love Wins.

It's The End of the World As We Know It?

2011-05-19T13:28:00.000-05:00

Rapturists absolutely salivate at the thought of others not being chosen, of others not being flown up to heaven with them to be with God. They love the idea of looking down on others in peril because they alone did what was right and just. It's what makes them feel special. It is utterly childish and unloving to smile upon your brethren who are allegedly going to be left on earth. That is not Christ's love. That is not what Christ taught. And most importantly it scratches out the idea that God's love is unconditional. It makes God look like a selective bastard who conducted this whole world experiment knowing that a fraction of a fraction would make the cut, willing to scrap a berjillion people because they exercised the free will He gave them in a way unpleasing to him. Numerous biblical parables (not to mention common sense) contradict this. Oh, and the bible specifically states that "no one knows the day or the hour". Not even these people. I think they do a disservice to Christianity and believers in general. Their credulous declarations cast a pall over all believers as being "nutters".

End of the world? I call bullshit.

I'm halfway through Barbara Rossing's book The Rapture Exposed: The Message of Hope in the Book of Revelation. It is a worthy read and one that knocks any rapturistic attempt at logic in the dirt.

About the Book:

The idea of "The Rapture" --- the return of Christ to rescue and deliver Christians off the earth --- is an extremely popular interpretation of the Bible's Book of Revelation and a jumping-off point for the best-selling "Left Behind" series of books. This interpretation, based on a psychology of fear and destruction, guides the daily acts of thousands if not millions of people worldwide. In The Rapture Exposed, Barbara Rossing argues that this script for the world's future is nothing more than a disingenuous distortion of the Bible. The truth, Rossing argues, is that Revelation offers a vision of God's healing love for the world. The Rapture Exposed reclaims Christianity from fundamentalists' destructive reading of the biblical story and back into God's beloved community.

Blame Woodstock: Church Report Cites Social Tumult in Priest Scandals

2011-05-18T13:10:00.001-05:00

I may be off my rocker here, but when an organization wants to REGAIN credibility through statistical studies wouldn't they be better off hiring an impartial, unbiased outside source to conduct a study? Yeah, thought so. Goal not achieved.

Blaming the sexual revolution in America for the sexual crimes of priests is as good as saying everyone should go back to the Victorian sensibilities of being ashamed of sex, their bodies, and homosexuality. Women should stay home and endure sex and no one should ever be nude or talk about sex, eroticism or any of those naughty sinful things. Placing blame is what I expect the Catholic Church to do. It becomes comical when they do it this overtly, though.

I'd like to point out a laughable moment in this report:

In one of the most counterintuitive findings, the report says that fewer than 5 percent of the abusive priests exhibited behavior consistent with pedophilia, which it defines as a “psychiatric disorder that is characterized by recurrent fantasies, urges and behaviors about prepubescent children. “Thus, it is inaccurate to refer to abusers as ‘pedophile priests,’ ” the report says.

And all this time I thought pedophilia behavior was exhibited by adults having sex with children.

Actions speak louder than any psych eval, folks. This report is a crock of shit, if I may be so bold. Since the beginning of priesthood in general there have been abuses. I personally feel as if celibacy is and always has been the problem here. By the very nature of our biological design, we're programmed to want sex...hetero, homo, or otherwise. God designed us to copulate. It ranks right up there as one of the most powerful forces in the universe. So remind me again why this ridiculous deprivation continues? To ensure that church property doesn't fall into the hands of offspring? Yeah, maybe it is time to rethink that business model.

The raping of innocent children by a priest - someone who the whole family is taught to trust with their darkest sins in the confessional - is the ultimate violation of human decency.

Hormones often take precedence over the mind's will, and in these tragically numerous cases will continue as long as one "vice" is stifled - it will cause another to be indulged. This goes for anything. Why do you think so many priests can drink you under the table?

----------------------------------------------------------------

Church Report Cites Social Tumult in Priest Scandals

By LAURIE GOODSTEIN

New York Times - May 17, 2011 - Original Source

A five-year study commissioned by the nation’s Roman Catholic bishops to provide a definitive answer to what caused the church’s sexual abuse crisis has concluded that neither the all-male celibate priesthood nor homosexuality were to blame.

Instead, the report says, the abuse occurred because priests who were poorly prepared and monitored, and were under stress, landed amid the social and sexual turmoil of the 1960s and ’70s.

Known occurrences of sexual abuse of minors by priests rose sharply during those decades, the report found, and the problem grew worse when the church’s hierarchy responded by showing more care for the perpetrators than the victims.

The “blame Woodstock” explanation has been floated by bishops since the church was engulfed by scandal in the United States in 2002 and by Pope Benedict XVI after it erupted in Europe in 2010.

But this study is likely to be regarded as the most authoritative analysis of the scandal in the Catholic Church in America. The study, initiated in 2006, was conducted by a team of researchers at the John Jay College of Criminal Justice in New York City at a cost of $1.8 million. About half was provided by the bishops, with additional money contributed by Catholic organizations and foundations. The National Institute of Justice, the research agency of the United States Department of Justice, supplied about $280,000.

The report was to be released Wednesday by the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops in Washington, but the Religion News Service published an account of the report on its Web site on Tuesday. A copy of the report was also obtained by The New York Times. The bishops have said they hope the report will advance the understanding and prevention of child sexual abuse in society at large.

The researchers concluded that it was not possible for the church, or for anyone, to identify abusive priests in advance. Priests who abused minors have no particular “psychological characteristics,” “developmental histories” or mood disorders that distinguished them from priests who had not abused, the researchers found.

Since the scandal broke, conservatives in the church have blamed gay priests for perpetrating the abuse, while liberals have argued that the all-male, celibate culture of the priesthood was the cause. This report will satisfy neither flank.

The report notes that homosexual men began entering the seminaries “in noticeable numbers” from the late 1970s through the 1980s. By the time this cohort entered the priesthood, in the mid-1980s, the reports of sexual abuse of minors by priests began to drop and then to level off. If anything, the report says, the abuse decreased as more gay priests began serving the church.

Many more boys than girls were victimized, the report says, not because the perpetrators were gay, but simply because the priests had more access to boys than to girls, in parishes, schools and extracurricular activities.

In one of the most counterintuitive findings, the report says that fewer than 5 percent of the abusive priests exhibited behavior consistent with pedophilia, which it defines as a “psychiatric disorder that is characterized by recurrent fantasies, urges and behaviors about prepubescent children.

“Thus, it is inaccurate to refer to abusers as ‘pedophile priests,’ ” the report says.

That finding is likely to prove controversial, in part because the report employs a definition of “prepubescent” children as those age 10 and under. Using this cutoff, the report found that only 22 percent of the priests’ victims were prepubescent.

The American Psychiatric Association’s Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders classifies a prepubescent child as generally age 13 or younger. If the John Jay researchers had used that cutoff, a vast majority of the abusers’ victims would have been considered prepubescent.

The report, “The Causes and Context of Sexual Abuse of Minors by Catholic Priests in the United States, 1950-2002,” is the second produced by researchers at John Jay College. The first, on the “nature and scope” of the problem, was released in 2004.

Even before seeing it, victims advocates attacked the report as suspect because it relies on data provided by the church’s dioceses and religious orders.

Anne Barrett Doyle, the co-director of BishopAccountability.org, a Web site that compiles reports on abuse cases, said, “There aren’t many dioceses where prosecutors have gotten involved, but in every single instance there’s a vast gap — a multiplier of two, three or four times — between the numbers of perpetrators that the prosecutors find and what the bishops released.”

David Clohessy, national director of the Chicago-based Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests, said that while the report contained no surprises, it had nonetheless been a disappointment because it did not include recommendations for far-reaching reforms, including limiting the power of bishops. Mr. Clohessy said this was critical because bishops had covered up many instances of sexual abuse by priests in the past.

“Predictably and conveniently, the bishops have funded a report that says what they’ve said all along, and what they wanted to hear back,” he said. “Fundamentally, they’ve found that they needn’t even consider any substantive changes.”

Robert M. Hoatson, a priest and a founder of Road to Recovery, which offers counseling and referrals to victims, said the idea that the sexual and social upheavals of past decades were to blame for the abuse of children was an attempt to shift responsibility from church leaders. Mr. Hoatson said he had been among those who had been abused.“It deflects responsibility from the bishops and puts it on to a sociological problem,” he said. “This is a people problem. It wasn’t because of the ’70s, and it wasn’t the ’60s, and it wasn’t because of the 1450s. This was something individuals did.”

Kristine Ward, the chairwoman of the National Survivor Advocates Coalition, said the cultural explanation did not appear to explain why abuse cases within the Catholic church have shaken places from Australia and Ireland to South America. “Does the culture of the U.S. in the 1960s explain that? It’s hard to believe,” she said.

William Donohue, president of the Catholic League, a conservative Catholic group, however said he believes permissiveness in the church in the 1960s and 1970s - particularly at seminaries - had been a significant reason for the rise in sexual abuse. Mr. Donohue said that while he generally supported the report’s findings, he believed that the study seemed to have purposefully avoided linking abuse cases with the increase in the number of gay men who became priests during the 1960s and 1970s. “The authors go through all sorts of contortions to deny the obvious - that obviously, homosexuality was at work,” Mr. Donohue said.

In Philadelphia, where a grand jury in February found that as many as 37 priests suspected of behavior ranging from sexual abuse to inappropriate actions were still serving in ministry. The archdiocese initially rejected the grand jury’s findings, but soon suspended 26 priests from ministry.

An essay in the Catholic magazine Commonweal last week by Ana Maria Catanzaro, who heads the Archdiocese of Philadelphia’s sexual-abuse review board, which is supposed to advise the archdiocese on how to handle abuse cases, said that the board was shocked to learn about the dozens of cases uncovered by the grand jury. Her essay raised questions about whether bishops provide accurate data even to their own, in-house review boards.

Still, the John Jay report says that when it comes to analyzing the incidence and causes of sexual abuse, “No organization has undertaken a study of itself in the manner of the Catholic Church.”

Because there are no comparable studies conducted by other institutions, religious or secular, the report says, “It is impossible to accurately compare the rate of sexual abuse within the Catholic Church to rates of abuse in other organizations.”

Googling God & eSpirituality

2011-05-16T12:38:00.000-05:00

I think the blog post below is long overdue. I've been consuming spiritual e-content for years and it has really helped me flesh out what it is I actually believe outside of the dogma I had been programmed to believe by the Catholic Church. It all started with Martin Zender's whole catalog of podcasts and progressed through NPR podcasts about spirituality (all the time burning through stacks of traditional books - many listed under my "Recommended Resources" on the side, there).

My search was not only internal but external, not only analog but digital.

I think many people are disenfranchized with religious institutions feeling that they have the monopoly on God and are seeking answers online. Because it is such a personal issue, it can be risky to conduct open dialogue about one's beliefs on forums like Facebook or Twitter. God knows I have been in the midst of word wars on Facebook before. However, I am connected with other like-minded Christian Universalists on Facebook and enjoy reading posts and notes covering the obviously touchy topic that binds us. I'm also suspicious that I was recently unfriended by a close high school friend because I had this site linked to my Facebook profile and she found my beliefs to conflict with hers to such a degree that she couldn't even open up a discussion with me. She just...unfriended me. I accept that. I just find it a shame that fundamentalist Christians who are so engrossed in their own answers refuse to ask any questions in order to grow spiritually. They are stunted.

Technology as a means of information and spiritual support reveals in spades the unnecessary function that church buildings will play going forward. Yes, I think real personal interaction is necessary. I think shaking hands and hugging and speaking to one another in fellowship is needed. However, the structure of the physical church has morphed into 1s and 0s and new online communities are developing to hold online masses and services. People from all over the world are being connected through mouse clicks soaked in the teachings of Christ. Through YouTube and Skype, podcasts and blogs, God has infiltrated social networks and online forums offering us seekers the "Gutenberg Moment" in curating spiritual information for ourselves.

And today I just feel like ending my two cents worth with this statement that is in my mind today:

Unconditional love means you don't have to do anything to earn it. Not even believe.

------------------------

My Take: How technology could bring down the church

By Lisa Miller, Special to CNN
May 15th, 2011 - Original Source Link

This year marks the 400th anniversary of the King James Bible, and Bible publishers are ostentatiously commemorating the landmark by producing an abundance of gorgeous doorstops. Leather bound Bibles. Two-volume sets. Replicas of the 1611 version complete with “original” illustrations.

The hoopla is entirely justified, since the King James Bible revolutionized Bible reading, bringing Scripture into a common vernacular for the first time for the English-speaking world.

It is not too much to say that the King James Bible - mass produced as it was, thanks to a new technology called the printing press - democratized religion by taking it out of the hands of the clerical few and giving it to the many.

Today, another revolution in Bible reading is underway – one that has nothing to do with gilt-edged paper. If the King James Bible brought the Bible to the English-speaking masses, today’s technology goes a giant step further, making Scripture - in any language and any translation - accessible to anyone on earth with a smartphone.

Just like the 500-year-old Protestant Reformation, which was aided by the advent of the printing press and which helped give birth to the King James Bible, changes wrought by new technology have the potential to bring down the church as we know it.

In the face of church leaders who claimed that only they could interpret the Bible for the common people, Reformation leaders like Martin Luther taught that nothing supersedes the authority of the Word itself.

"A simple layman armed with Scripture,” Luther wrote, “is greater than the mightiest pope without it."

In that vein, digital technology gives users the text, plain and simple, without the interpretive lens of established authorities. And it lets users share interpretations with other non-authorities, like family members, friends and coworkers.

With Scripture on iPhones and iPads, believers can bypass constraining religious structures - otherwise known as “church” - in favor of a more individual connection with God.

This helps solve a problem that Christian leaders are increasingly articulating: that even among people who say that Jesus Christ is their personal Lord and savior, folks don’t read the Bible.
According to a 2010 survey, more than a third of born-again Christians “rarely or never” read the Bible. Among “unaffiliated” people - that is, Americans who don’t belong to a religious congregation - more than two thirds say they don’t read the Bible.

Especially among 18-to-29 year olds, Bible reading has come to feel like homework, associated with “right” interpretations and “wrong ones,” and accompanied by stern lectures from the pulpit.

Young Christians “have come to expect experiences that appear unscripted and interactive,” the Christian demographer Dave Kinnaman told the Christian magazine Charisma in 2009, “that allow them to be open and honest with their questions, that are technologically stimulating, that are done alongside peers and within trusted relationships.”

This yearning for a more unmediated faith - including Bible verses live in your pocket or purse 24/7, available to inspire or console wherever and whenever they’re needed - has met an enthusiastic embrace.

For growing numbers of young people, a leather-bound Bible sitting like an artifact on a stand in the family living room has no allure. It’s not an invitation to exploration or questioning.

Young people want to “consume” their spirituality the way they do their news or their music. They want to dip and dabble, the way they browse Facebook.

Thus the almost-insane popularity of Youversion, a digital Bible available for free on iTunes and developed by a 34-year-old technology buff and Christian pastor from Oklahoma named Bobby Gruenewald. He conceived of it, he told me, while on a layover at Chicago O'Hare International Airport, wishing he had a Bible to read.

“What we’re really trying to address is, how do we increase engagement in the Bible?” he said.

Now available in 113 versions and 41 languages, including Arabic, Youversion has a community component that allows users to share thoughts and insights on Bible verses with friends. It has been installed on more than 20 million smartphones since 2008.

On May 2, Youversion staged its own King James commemorative event: for 400 seconds, starting at noon, more than 10,0000 users logged on and read a portion of the Bible – King James translation, of course - a kind of 21st century Bible-reading flash mob.

Traditionalists worry that technology allows young believers to practice religion without committing to what in the south is called “a church home” - and they’re right.

I did a public Q&A with Michigan pastor Rob Bell on the eve of the publication of his new bestseller "Love Wins" and was astonished, during the book-signing that followed, at how many acolytes felt they knew Rob through his sermons, which they regularly downloaded off the internet, even though they had never met him. They hailed from places like Australia, South Africa and New Jersey.

They listen to Bell while they’re working out, or commuting to work. They get their religion - like their meals – on the run.
It is now possible to imagine the extinction of the family Bible, long given as a gift on graduation day or other big occasions and inscribed with special dates: births, marriages, deaths.

Instead, the Bible may someday exist exclusively online, with features that allow for personalization: Link to photos of weddings and baptisms! “Share” favorite verses!

When Bible study can be done on Facebook as easily as in the church basement, and a favorite preacher can teach lessons via podcast, the necessity of physically gathering each week in the same place with the same people turns remote.

Without a doubt, this represents a new crisis for organized religion, a challenge to think again about what it means to be a “body” of believers.
The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of Lisa Miller.

Wife Beating According to the Quran

2011-05-10T14:38:00.000-05:00

Just as I frown upon misogyny in literalist Christianity, I ABHOR the violence towards women in literalist Islam. This makes me sick to my stomach. I just want to wrap all of these abused women in my arms to comfort them. Isn’t that what a loving God would do?

This is the glaring work of the proverbial antichrist.

“Do unto others…”

The God Women Need

2011-04-18T14:42:00.006-05:00

This is a terrific article. I love the questions raised. It reminds me of my days teaching Catechism when the kids would ask me why we "worshipped" Mary. And I had to explain that you don't worship her, per se, but simply ask for intercession and help - because that is what the Catholic Doctrine teaches. And it always felt weird to me. In the parables it seems as if the church found a figure (Mary) that appealed to women ("Come See the Softer Side of Christ?") - but keeping the power of "her" at arm's length - and using Mary as a role model of the meek mother birthing goodness...to market the role of the ideal Catholic breeder.

Putting the penis on a theological pedestal, it is an age old construction of God's manhood. And it has been a work-in-progress ever since, attempting to reinforce the phallus while denigrating the woman. Take for example the old Hebrew myth of Lilith - the alleged first wife of Adam. Her mythical demonization occurred because she wanted equality and ended up speaking the name of God. The story essentially demotes her to the status of a succubi because she exercised (gasp) independence. And let's not forget The Gospel of Mary which was promptly chucked out by the men deciding what gospels made "the cut". And Thecla, who traveled with Paul, who lived a celibate life and baptized herself and for whom you hear almost nothing about in mainstream gospels. Women are ghosts of scripture, floating in the background. Their power was whispered, while men's was shouted.

People have difficulty recognizing that the Christ was likely sent in a man's body because at that time in history women were not heard. However, times have changed. It needs to be made clear that Christ shines through women, too. And the demise of the Catholic Church is visible in the reluctance to allow women to become priests / serve mass. The extinction of that religion will be the pinnacle lesson on the dangers of archaic misogyny.

Here's how I feel about it using some Photoshopped images. The bottom line is that women are equal to men in the eyes of God. Period. They can be empowered "relayers of the Word" and the Catholic Church will suffer great loss unless they ungag the women. The Protestants get it. Look how well their churches are doing...

The God Women Need

The Washington Post National - April 18, 2011

By Jason Pitzl-Waters

Original Source

“We will not listen to the things you’ve said to us in the name of YHWH. On the contrary, we will certainly do all that we’ve vowed. We will make offerings to the Queen of Heaven, and pour libations to her as we used to do - we and our ancestors, our kings and princes in the towns of Judah and in the streets of Jerusalem - because then we had plenty of bread and we were satisfied, and suffered no misfortune. But since we ceased making offerings to the Queen of Heaven and pouring libations to her, we have lacked everything and have been consumed by sword and famine. And when we make offerings to the Queen of Heaven and pour libations to her, is it without our husbands’ approval that we make cakes in her likeness and pour libations to her?” – Jeremiah 44:15-19, translation by Graham Harvey, from the Hebrew text of the Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia, excerpted from “The Paganism Reader.”

Leaving aside the “separate but equal” theory of religious gender roles for a moment, one has only to look towards the headlines to see how dangerous the idea of female empowerment still is within the world of faith and belief. The New York Times reports that a committee of American bishops have accused Catholic theologian and nun Sister Elizabeth A. Johnson of violating church doctrine, issuing a lengthy critique of her book “Quest For the Living God” due in part to her suggestion of using female imagery for God, an idea (among others) the Committee on Doctrine says “contaminates” traditional Catholic understandings of God. “Contaminates,” what an interesting and unintentionally apt choice of words! Because reading that critique you can see the fear of contamination dripping from its sentences, hoping against hope of placing (in the words of the NYT) “the study of the male and female aspects of God [...] substantially off-limits,” lest women once more start making offerings to the Queen of Heaven.

Look at any religion’s myths, stories, or scriptures, is there room there for a female god? Does she exist? Art historian Merlin Stone, who passed away earlier this year, stated that “at the very dawn of religion, God was a woman. Do you remember?” Millions, perhaps billions, still do, and more awaken every day. They cast off the constricting “equality” of the dominant monotheisms while men from religious committees promote this spiritual amnesia as fast as they can. The conception of goddess, of a female divinity, undermines a religious and cultural power structure built on men. It asks too many questions, it makes too many demands, it voices the secret fear emblazoned on so many bumper stickers: “My Goddess gave birth to your God.”

If the goddesses are suppressed, if they are erased from history, reduced to lesser roles, or turned into demons, then there is no divinity that reflects the female experience. Instead of being the originators of life, subduers of injustice, and the source of all sovereignty, women are instead bearers of the “original sin.” No sane philosopher or theologian can claim this doesn’t change the very nature of a culture, or the way we perceive gender. Imagine for a moment how different the ever-raging debate over legal access to abortion, or even contraception, whether for or against, would be if women were seen as the final holy arbiters in the matter of creating life. I can only guess we’d see something very different from the parade of old white male politicians exclaiming about “moral” issues and threatening basic health care for women in the process. Once you open your mind to that first exercise in a world with goddesses it’s hard not to think of dozens, hundreds, more. Female priests and feminine divine pronouns would hardly skim the surface.

Finally, I want to ask people to think about equality. The great defense of the religions without goddesses is that women hold honored roles that are separate from men, yet equal in standing. But who, or what, is the arbiter of equality in this discussion? Who decided what was equal? God the Father? God the Son? The prophets? The holy books written by the hands of men? The all-male priesthoods? It quickly becomes clear that “equal” is what men within these patriarchal institutions say is equal, and women who stray outside the boundaries of this carefully designed equality are usually punished, ostracized, or worse. If there were a Goddess to balance God, what would be different? What if there were many goddesses and many gods, many ideas and conceptions of equality to choose from? Would Jimmy Carter have then uttered those words?

Is Hell Dead?

2011-04-14T12:00:00.002-05:00

"The unanswered questions aren't nearly as dangerous as the unquestioned answers." Damn right.

I approve of rocking the boat. Jesus did it. Martin Luther shook things up. Others have done it. Now its Rob Bell's turn. Kudos to him for it, too. To the open-minded, the ideas he suggests have merit with regard to how logic plays in God's love. To the staunchly fundamentalist, it is heresy to even SUGGEST that hell is not eternal. Logic trumps mistranslated bible verses every time. At least, for me it does. I finished his book and it was wonderful. I plan on doing a full review of it. I'm also passing it onto my quietly Universalist mother who still attends Catholic church weekly.

Today had an article about the critical Christian thought crusade that Bell is leading. Again. Damn right.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Is Hell Dead?

Time - 4/14/11 - by Jon Meacham

Source: http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,2065080-2,00.html

As part of a series on peacemaking, in late 2007, Pastor Rob Bell's Mars Hill Bible Church put on an art exhibit about the search for peace in a broken world. It was just the kind of avant-garde project that had helped power Mars Hill's growth (the Michigan church attracts 7,000 people each Sunday) as a nontraditional congregation that emphasizes discussion rather than dogmatic teaching. An artist in the show had included a quotation from Mohandas Gandhi. Hardly a controversial touch, one would have thought. But one would have been wrong.

A visitor to the exhibit had stuck a note next to the Gandhi quotation: "Reality check: He's in hell." Bell was struck.

Really? he recalls thinking.

Gandhi's in hell?

He is?

We have confirmation of this?

Somebody knows this?

Without a doubt?

And that somebody decided to take on the responsibility of letting the rest of us know?

So begins Bell's controversial new best seller, Love Wins: A Book About Heaven, Hell, and the Fate of Every Person Who Ever Lived. Works by Evangelical Christian pastors tend to be pious or at least on theological message. The standard Christian view of salvation through the death and resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth is summed up in the Gospel of John, which promises "eternal life" to "whosoever believeth in Him." Traditionally, the key is the acknowledgment that Jesus is the Son of God, who, in the words of the ancient creed, "for us and for our salvation came down from heaven ... and was made man." In the Evangelical ethos, one either accepts this and goes to heaven or refuses and goes to hell.

Bell, a tall, 40-year-old son of a Michigan federal judge, begs to differ. He suggests that the redemptive work of Jesus may be universal — meaning that, as his book's subtitle puts it, "every person who ever lived" could have a place in heaven, whatever that turns out to be. Such a simple premise, but with Easter at hand, this slim, lively book has ignited a new holy war in Christian circles and beyond. When word of Love Wins reached the Internet, one conservative Evangelical pastor, John Piper, tweeted, "Farewell Rob Bell," unilaterally attempting to evict Bell from the Evangelical community. R. Albert Mohler Jr., president of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, says Bell's book is "theologically disastrous. Any of us should be concerned when a matter of theological importance is played with in a subversive way." In North Carolina, a young pastor was fired by his church for endorsing the book. (From TIME's archives; "Does Heaven Exist.")

The traditionalist reaction is understandable, for Bell's arguments about heaven and hell raise doubts about the core of the Evangelical worldview, changing the common understanding of salvation so much that Christianity becomes more of an ethical habit of mind than a faith based on divine revelation. "When you adopt universalism and erase the distinction between the church and the world," says Mohler, "then you don't need the church, and you don't need Christ, and you don't need the cross. This is the tragedy of nonjudgmental mainline liberalism, and it's Rob Bell's tragedy in this book too."

Particularly galling to conservative Christian critics is that Love Wins is not an attack from outside the walls of the Evangelical city but a mutiny from within — a rebellion led by a charismatic, popular and savvy pastor with a following. Is Bell's Christianity — less judgmental, more fluid, open to questioning the most ancient of assumptions — on an inexorable rise? "I have long wondered if there is a massive shift coming in what it means to be a Christian," Bell says. "Something new is in the air."

Which is what has many traditional Evangelicals worried. Bell's book sheds light not only on enduring questions of theology and fate but also on a shift within American Christianity. More indie rock than "Rock of Ages," with its videos and comfort with irony (Bell sometimes seems an odd combination of Billy Graham and Conan O'Brien), his style of doctrine and worship is clearly playing a larger role in religious life, and the ferocity of the reaction suggests that he is a force to be reckoned with.

Otherwise, why reckon with him at all? A similar work by a pastor from one of the declining mainline Protestant denominations might have merited a hostile blog post or two — bloggers, like preachers, always need material — but it is difficult to imagine that an Episcopal priest's eschatological musings would have provoked the volume of criticism directed at Bell, whose reach threatens prevailing Evangelical theology.

Bell insists he is only raising the possibility that theological rigidity — and thus a faith of exclusion — is a dangerous thing. He believes in Jesus' atonement; he says he is just unclear on whether the redemption promised in Christian tradition is limited to those who meet the tests of the church. It is a case for living with mystery rather than demanding certitude.

From a traditionalist perspective, though, to take away hell is to leave the church without its most powerful sanction. If heaven, however defined, is everyone's ultimate destination in any event, then what's the incentive to confess Jesus as Lord in this life? If, in other words, Gandhi is in heaven, then why bother with accepting Christ? If you say the Bible doesn't really say what a lot of people have said it says, then where does that stop? If the verses about hell and judgment aren't literal, what about the ones on adultery, say, or homosexuality? Taken to their logical conclusions, such questions could undermine much of conservative Christianity. (See the Top 10 Religion Stories of 2010.)

What the Hell?

From the Apostle Paul to John Paul II, from Augustine to Calvin, Christians have debated atonement and judgment for nearly 2,000 years. Early in the 20th century, Harry Emerson Fosdick came to represent theological liberalism, arguing against the literal truth of the Bible and the existence of hell. It was time, progressives argued, for the faith to surrender its supernatural claims.

Bell is more at home with this expansive liberal tradition than he is with the old-time believers of Inherit the Wind. He believes that Jesus, the Son of God, was sacrificed for the sins of humanity and that the prospect of a place of eternal torment seems irreconcilable with the God of love. Belief in Jesus, he says, should lead human beings to work for the good of this world. What comes next has to wait. "When we get to what happens when we die, we don't have any video footage," says Bell. "So let's at least be honest that we are speculating, because we are." He is quick to note, though, that his own speculation, while unconventional, is not unprecedented. "At the center of the Christian tradition since the first church," Bell writes, "have been a number who insist that history is not tragic, hell is not forever, and love, in the end, wins and all will be reconciled to God."

It is also true that the Christian tradition since the first church has insisted that history is tragic for those who do not believe in Jesus; that hell is, for them, forever; and that love, in the end, will envelop those who profess Jesus as Lord, and they — and they alone — will be reconciled to God. Such views cannot be dismissed because they are inconvenient or uncomfortable: they are based on the same Bible that liberals use to make the opposite case. This is one reason religious debate can seem a wilderness of mirrors, an old CIA phrase describing the bewildering world of counterintelligence.

Still, the dominant view of the righteous in heaven and the damned in hell owes more to the artistic legacy of the West, from Michelangelo to Dante to Blake, than it does to history or to unambiguous biblical teaching. Neither pagan nor Jewish tradition offered a truly equivalent vision of a place of eternal torment; the Greek and Roman underworlds tended to be morally neutral, as did much of the Hebraic tradition concerning Sheol, the realm of the dead.

Things many Christian believers take for granted are more complicated than they seem. It was only when Jesus failed to return soon after the Passion and Resurrection appearances that the early church was compelled to make sense of its recollections of his teachings. Like the Bible — a document that often contradicts itself and from which one can construct sharply different arguments — theology is the product of human hands and hearts. What many believers in the 21st century accept as immutable doctrine was first formulated in the fog and confusion of the 1st century, a time when the followers of Jesus were baffled and overwhelmed by their experience of losing their Lord; many had expected their Messiah to be a Davidic military leader, not an atoning human sacrifice.

When Jesus spoke of the "kingdom of heaven," he was most likely referring not to a place apart from earth, one of clouds and harps and an eternity with your grandmother, but to what he elsewhere called the "kingdom of God," a world redeemed and renewed in ways beyond human imagination. To 1st century ears in ancient Judea, Jesus' talk of the kingdom was centered on the imminent arrival of a new order marked by the defeat of evil, the restoration of Israel and a general resurrection of the dead — all, in the words of the prayer he taught his disciples, "on earth."

There is, however, no escaping the fact that Jesus speaks in the Bible of a hell for the "condemned." He sometimes uses the word Gehenna, which was a valley near Jerusalem associated with the sacrifice of children by fire to the Phoenician god Moloch; elsewhere in the New Testament, writers (especially Paul and John the Divine) tell of a fiery pit (Tartarus or Hades) in which the damned will spend eternity. "Depart from me, you cursed [ones], into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels," Jesus says in Matthew. In Mark he speaks of "the unquenchable fire." The Book of Revelation paints a vivid picture — in a fantastical, problematic work that John the Divine says he composed when he was "in the spirit on the Lord's day," a signal that this is not an Associated Press report — of the lake of fire and the dismissal of the damned from the presence of God to a place where "they will be tormented day and night for ever and ever."

And yet there is a contrary scriptural trend that suggests, as Jesus puts it, that the gates of hell shall not finally prevail, that God will wipe away every tear — not just the tears of Evangelical Christians but the tears of all. Bell puts much stock in references to the universal redemption of creation: in Matthew, Jesus speaks of the "renewal of all things"; in Acts, Peter says Jesus will "restore everything"; in Colossians, Paul writes that "God was pleased to ... reconcile to himself all things, whether things on earth or things in heaven."

So is it heaven for Christians who say they are Christians and hell for everybody else? What about babies, or people who die without ever hearing the Gospel through no fault of their own? (As Bell puts it, "What if the missionary got a flat tire?") Who knows? Such tangles have consumed Christianity for millennia and likely will for millennia to come.

What gives the debate over Bell new significance is that his message is part of an intriguing scholarly trend unfolding simultaneously with the cultural, generational and demographic shifts made manifest at Mars Hill. Best expressed, perhaps, in the work of N.T. Wright, the Anglican bishop of Durham, England (Bell is a Wright devotee), this school focuses on the meaning of the texts themselves, reading them anew and seeking, where appropriate, to ask whether an idea is truly rooted in the New Testament or is attributable to subsequent church tradition and theological dogma.

For these new thinkers, heaven can mean different things. In some biblical contexts it is a synonym for God. In others it signifies life in the New Jerusalem, which, properly understood, is the reality that will result when God brings together the heavens and the earth. In yet others it seems to suggest moments of intense human communion and compassion that are, in theological terms, glimpses of the divine love that one might expect in the world to come. One thing heaven is not is an exclusive place removed from earth. This line of thinking has implications for the life of religious communities in our own time. If the earth is, in a way, to be our eternal home, then its care, and the care of all its creatures, takes on fresh urgency.

Bell's Journey

The easy narrative about Bell would be one of rebellion — that he is reacting to the strictures of a suffocating childhood by questioning long-standing dogma. The opposite is true. Bell's creed of conviction and doubt — and his comfort with ambiguity and paradox — comes from an upbringing in which he was immersed in faith but encouraged to ask questions. His father, a central figure in his life, is a federal judge appointed by President Reagan in 1987. (Rob still remembers the drive to Washington in the family Oldsmobile for the confirmation hearings.) "I remember him giving me C.S. Lewis in high school," Bell says. "My parents were both very intellectually honest, straightforward, and for them, faith meant that you were fully engaged." As they were raising their family, the Bells, in addition to regular churchgoing, created a rigorous ethos of devotion and debate at home. Dinner-table conversations were pointed; Lewis' novels and nonfiction were required reading.

The roots of Love Wins can be partly traced to the deathbed of a man Rob Bell never met: his grandfather, a civil engineer in Michigan who died when Rob's father was 8. The Bells' was a very conservative Evangelical household. When the senior Bell died, there was to be no grief. "We weren't allowed to mourn, because the funeral of a Christian is supposed to be a celebration of the believer in heaven with Jesus right now," says Robert Bell Sr. "But if you're 8 years old and your dad — the breadwinner — just died, it feels different. Sad."

The story of how his dad, still a child, was to deal with death has stayed with Rob. "To weep, to shed any tears — that would be doubting the sovereignty of God," Rob says now, looking back. "That was the thing — 'They're all in heaven, so we're happy about that.' It doesn't matter how you are actually humanly responding to this moment ..." Bell pauses and chuckles ironically, a bit incredulous. "We're all just supposed to be thrilled."

Robby — his mother still calls him that — was emotionally precocious. "When he was around 10 years old, I detected that he had a great interest and concern for people," his father says. "There he'd be, riding along with me, with his little blond hair, going to see sick folks or friends who were having problems, and he would get back in the truck after a visit and begin to analyze them and their situations very acutely. He had a feel for people and how they felt from very early on."

Rob was a twice-a-week churchgoer at the Baptist and nondenominational churches the family attended at different times — services on Sunday, youth group on Wednesday. He recalls a kind of quiet frustration even then. "I remember thinking, 'You know, if Jesus is who this guy standing up there says he is, this should be way more compelling.' This should have a bit more electricity. The knob should be way more to the right, you know?"

Music, not the church, was his first consuming passion. (His wife Kristen claims he said he wanted to be a pastor when they first met early on at Wheaton College in Illinois. Bell is skeptical: "I swear to this day that that was a line.") He and some friends started a band when he was a sophomore. "I had always had creative energy but no outlet," he says. "I really discovered music, writing and playing, working with words and images and metaphors. You might say the music unleashed a monster." (See pictures of spiritual healing around the world.)

The band became central to him. Then two things happened: the guitar player decided to go to seminary, and Bell came down with viral meningitis. "It took the wind out of our sails," he says. "I had no Plan B. I was a wreck. I was devastated, because our band was going to make it. We were going to live in a terrible little house and do terrible jobs at first, because that's what great bands do — they start out living in terrible little houses and doing terrible little jobs." His illness — "a freak brain infection" — changed his life, Bell says.

At 21, Rob was teaching barefoot waterskiing at HoneyRock Camp, near Three Lakes, Wis., when he preached his first sermon. "I didn't know anything," he says. "I took off my Birkenstocks beforehand. I had this awareness that my life would never be the same again." The removal of the shoes is an interesting detail for Bell to remember. ("Do not come any closer," God says to Moses in the Book of Exodus. "Take off your sandals, for the place where you are standing is holy ground.") Bell says it was just intuitive, but the intuition suggests he had a sense of himself as a player in the unfolding drama of God in history. "Create things and share them," Bell says. "It all made sense. That moment is etched. I remember thinking distinctly, 'I could be terrible at this.' But I knew this would get me up in the morning. I went to Fuller that fall."

Fuller Theological Seminary, in Pasadena, Calif., is an eclectic place, attracting 4,000 students from 70 countries and more than 100 denominations. "It's pretty hard to sit with Pentecostals and Holiness people and mainline Presbyterians and Anglicans and come away with a closed mind-set that draws firm boundaries about theology," says Fuller president Richard Mouw.

After seminary, Bell's work moved in two directions. He was recovering the context of the New Testament while creating a series of popular videos on Christianity called Nooma, Greek for wind or spirit. He began to attract a following, and Mars Hill — named for the site in Athens where Paul preached the Christian gospel of resurrection to the pagan world — was founded in Grand Rapids, Mich., in 1999. "Whenever people wonder why a church is growing, they say, 'He's preaching the Bible.' Well, lots of people are preaching the Bible, and they don't have parking problems," says Bell.

Mars Hill did have parking problems, and Bell's sudden popularity posed some risks for the young pastor. Pride and self-involvement are perennial issues for ministers, who, like politicians, grow accustomed to the sound of their own voices saying Important Things and to the deference of the flock. By the time Bell was 30, he was an Evangelical celebrity. (He had founded Mars Hill when he was 28.) He was referred to as a "rock star" in this magazine. "There was this giant spotlight on me," he says. "All of a sudden your words are parsed. I found myself — and I think this happens to a lot of people — wanting to shrink away from it. But I decided, Just own it. I'm very comfortable in a room with thousands of people. I do have this voice. What will I say?"

And how will he say it? The history of Evangelism is in part the history of media and methods: Billy Sunday mastered the radio, Billy Graham television; now churches like Bell's are at work in the digital vineyards of downloads and social media. Demography is also working in Bell's favor. "He's trying to reach a generation that's more comfortable with mystery, with unsolved questions," says Mouw, noting that his own young grandchildren are growing up with Hindu and Muslim friends and classmates. "For me, Hindus and Muslims were the people we sent missionaries off to in places we called 'Arabia,'" Mouw says. "Now that diversity is part of the fabric of daily life. It makes a difference. My generation wanted truth — these are folks who want authenticity. The whole judgmentalism and harshness is something they want to avoid."

If Bell is right about hell, then why do people need ecclesiastical traditions at all? Why aren't the Salvation Army and the United Way sufficient institutions to enact a gospel of love, sparing us the talk of heaven and hellfire and damnation and all the rest of it? Why not close up the churches?

Bell knows the arguments and appreciates the frustrations. "I don't know anyone who hasn't said, 'Let's turn out the lights and say we gave it a shot,'" he says. "But you can't — I can't — get away from what this Jesus was, and is, saying to us. What the book tries to do is park itself right in the midst of the tension with a Jesus who offers an urgent and immediate call — 'Repent! Be transformed! Turn!' At the same time, I've got other sheep. There's a renewal of all things. There's water from the rock. People will come from the East and from the West. The scandal of the gospel is Jesus' radical, healing love for a world that's broken."

Fair enough, but let's be honest: religion heals, but it also kills. Why support a supernatural belief system that, for instance, contributed to that minister in Florida's burning of a Koran, which led to the deaths of innocent U.N. workers in Afghanistan?

"I think Jesus shares your critique," Bell replies. "We don't burn other people's books. I think Jesus is fairly pissed off about it as well."

On Sunday, April 17, at Mars Hill, Bell will be joined by singer-songwriter Brie Stoner (who provided some of the music for his Nooma series) and will teach the first 13 verses of the third chapter of Revelation, which speaks of "the city of my God, the new Jerusalem, which is coming down out of heaven from my God ... Whoever has ears, let them hear what the Spirit says to the churches." The precise meaning of the words is open to different interpretations. But this much is clear: Rob Bell has much to say, and many are listening.

How Priests Accused Of Abuse Can Go Undetected (NPR)

2011-03-30T13:25:00.000-05:00

And still...women are not allowed to be priests in the Church.

Step right up! Step right up! Marvel as Catholic males singlehandedly ensure the extinction of their religion! A faith in which a dastardly number figuratively and literally rape the Godly innocent out of sexual repression as directed by other males. Oh, and will also be defended by those same males.

Something's broken here.

----------------------------------

How Priests Accused Of Abuse Can Go Undetected

by Barbara Bradley Hagerty - NPR - Original Source

March 29, 2011

Listen to the story here:

A couple of years ago, the Philadelphia archdiocese heard about three priests who had allegedly raped two boys. It gave the priests' files to law enforcement, and a grand jury began to investigate. Then, the grand jury stumbled on a bombshell. A church employee testified that there were many other priests the panel should know about. "The grand jury found that a policy of zero tolerance was not actually in effect," says District Attorney Seth Williams, "and that there were many priests that had allegations made against them that were still in active ministry." There were 37 priests, according to a scathing report by the grand jury, which was released last month. Shaken by accusations that it was trying to keep abusers in ministry without telling parishes, the archdiocese moved quickly: It hired Gina Maisto Smith, a former prosecutor with a specialty in child sex abuse cases, to investigate further. The church soon put 21 clergy on administrative leave. Smith is unable to speak to the specific cases, but she says she has seen no evidence that church officials intentionally protected sexual predators. "I can say with clarity that I saw the archdiocese doing what it could do within the systems that it had and making the best decisions they could under the circumstances," she says. This raises the question: With all the safeguards the Roman Catholic Church put into place after the sex abuse scandal in 2002, how could this happen? If the archdiocese was following all the right procedures, how did these priests fall through the cracks? It turns out that there's a lot of play in the rules, says Terry McKiernan, president of Bishop Accountability.org, a watchdog group. He says when an allegation comes in the church, the bishop doesn't have to pursue it very far. "A bishop may decide at a very early stage that an allegation is without merit," he says. "And if he does that, we never even get to the stage of a priest being removed." Archbishop of Philadelphia Cardinal Justin Rigali, who suspended the priests named in the grand jury's report, said he was "truly sorry" for harm done to victims and members of the community for "this great evil and crime." Matt Rourke/AP Archbishop of Philadelphia Cardinal Justin Rigali, who suspended the priests named in the grand jury's report, said he was "truly sorry" for harm done to victims and members of the community for "this great evil and crime." McKiernan says he believes that's what happened in Philadelphia. He notes that the archdiocese forwarded only seven of the 21 cases to its review board, a panel of lay people who are supposed to hear every allegation of sexual abuse and act to protect the victims. Often, he says, the review board "doesn't know all the facts" because it is the bishop or his senior officials who decide which cases to present to the board. Moreover, McKiernan and others say review boards sometimes "hold their punches" because they are handpicked by the bishop. In fact, the grand jury report excoriated the Philadelphia review board because it rejected every allegation it did hear as "unsubstantiated." Philadelphia may not be alone, says William Gavin, a former FBI agent who was hired by the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops to audit each of the 195 Catholic dioceses each year and make sure they're preventing and reporting sex abuse cases. "It was an audit in quotes," he says. "I think it was more of a program review than anything else." Gavin says he could ask whether a diocese is conducting background checks on priests and employees — but he was not allowed to look at records that would indicate whether there were any allegations against a priest. "We didn't have the benefit of drilling down into personnel files to see what might be there," Gavin says. "They were off limits." Gavin and his auditors had to depend on a bishop's word about whether anyone had been accused of abuse. In addition, the questionnaire they use wouldn't have spotted the Philadelphia 21 anyway. It only asks about allegations within the past year, not older cases.Some believe the only way to get real answers is to have an outsider look at the priests' files. "The only reason we know about this situation in Philadelphia is because a grand jury report has been issued, and a grand jury process has been looking at this archdiocese for years," McKiernan says. "I think if we had that kind of aggressive law enforcement in other dioceses, the same problems would be revealed." McKiernan says they already have. In Cleveland, for example, the diocese said that 28 priests had been accused of abuse, but when a prosecutor looked at the files, the estimate went to 145. When the New Hampshire attorney general looked at the files of the diocese of Manchester, 27 new names emerged. And McKiernan has obtained an internal 2009 document from the Boston archdiocese that says there were 40 credibly accused priests whose names are still unknown to the public. Even critics say that most dioceses are trying to do their best at protecting victims and still giving due process to priests who may have been wrongly accused. And that can be a difficult line to walk. "Many people think the archdiocese doesn't get it," says Donna Farrell, a spokesperson for the archdiocese of Philadelphia. "We do. And the task, the job ahead of us, is to recognize where we've fallen short — and to let our actions speak to our resolve." The faithful will surely be watching — and so will prosecutors.

The Good, The Bad, and the Beautiful

2011-03-28T13:30:00.000-05:00

I'm 3/4 through Rob Bell's book "Love Wins" and am at the point where I want to buy copies for some people I know who are on the fence about the whole "eternal hell thing". The sheer amount of questions raised is brilliant. It is more of a book of conceptual "what if's" and "if this, then that" scenarios that allows the reader to actually think through the *logic* of the Jesus story and bible teachings. And it is written in plain language so that one need not hold a theology degree to comprehend it.

Though he claims that he's not a Universalist, everything I'm reading so far points to that all consuming love of God that is characteristic of Christian Universalism. And may I add that it is a breath of fresh air that he actually cites the original Greek and Hebrew words in the Old and New Testament that are so pivotal in pointing to God's message that hell is not necessarily eternal at all (i.e. aion, Hades, Tartarus, Sheol, etc.)

Speaking of the love of God, I need to share the following video which moved me to tears. I am utterly and completely humbled.

http://www.facebook.com/video/video.php?v=1378237514624

And on a personal note, I recently realized that I have been unfriended on Facebook by someone who I was good friends with in high school. I'm not entirely sure why but I can only speculate that it was over our differences in faith. She is a fundamentalist Christian and I am a Christian Universalist (Heretic). There was no dialogue over the reason so I can't say for sure, but if it is the reason, I'm...very disappointed.

I find that traditional Christians are much more difficult to have intelligent debate with about God saving everyone in the end. More often than not they are very insistent on their belief elitism, which means that they are not interested in listening or examining WHY they believe what they believe without feeling properly insulted at being questioned to begin with. I'm closer to having fellowship with unbelievers, at this point. My husband and best friends WHO ARE ALL WONDERFUL ATHEISTS understand and respectfully discuss with me the Love of God and my views on Universalism better than anyone else. Our discussions are intelligent and help raise further questions that assist my own personal examination of faith. They are the wetstone on which I sharpen my spirituality. MY ATHEISTS are also noticeably more kindhearted and moral than many of the self-proclaimed Christians I know. Bell touches upon a bit of this in his book, too.

There are some great truisms in Bell's book and when I have it in front of me (perhaps next time) I will do some quotin'.

The Bell Curve: Pastor loses job after questioning hell's existence

2011-03-24T13:53:00.001-05:00

I'm calling this the "Bell curve". Once you learn about the Good News, you can't logically go back to the old way of thinking. This pastor, I guarantee you, will never go back to his old ways of thinking.

I think some "Christians" hope that they are among the elite that will make it to heaven, watching the billions of other poor misled saps burn in hell forever. Because it is nice to feel special...and chosen...and right. I think this wish is selfish, anti-Christian, immature at best, criminal at worst. I think if the crucifixion was carried out in order to save the ENTIRE world, then it was a huge failure - according to the Christian traditionalist belief. Also, if I believe in Christ (thus securing my salvation), then shouldn't I credit myself for my own salvation? Does Jesus ride by and slip the belief pill in the drinks of the chosen?

For God so LOVED the world... right?

I, for one, will take my chances in over-estimating the Love of God. Every single being is as loved by God as the next on this rock. Those who think otherwise are retributionists who distort the Gospel that Jesus taught.

Once my eyes were open to the all-encompassing love of God, I began to see others more as brethren and less as "those poor misled saps", thus my empathy and agape increased - God's love being the Great Equalizer. Not the Dividing Line.

Rob Bell's book "Love Wins" should be arriving at my house today or tomorrow. My spirit is stoked to read it and mull over the questions. The questions...those are more important than the answers.

-----------------------------------------------------------------
Pastor loses job after questioning hell's existence

New book is spurring debate over the traditional view of hell as a place of eternal torment for damned souls

Source: AP 3/24/11 - Original Link

DURHAM, N.C. — When Chad Holtz lost his old belief in hell, he also lost his job.

The pastor of a rural United Methodist church in North Carolina wrote a note on his Facebook page supporting a new book by Rob Bell, a prominent young evangelical pastor and critic of the traditional view of hell as a place of eternal torment for billions of damned souls.

Two days later, Holtz was told complaints from church members prompted his dismissal from Marrow's Chapel in Henderson.

"I think justice comes and judgment will happen, but I don't think that means an eternity of torment," Holtz said. "But I can understand why people in my church aren't ready to leave that behind. It's something I'm still grappling with myself."

The debate over Bell's new book "Love Wins" has quickly spread across the evangelical precincts of the Internet, in part because of an eye-catching promotional video posted on YouTube.

Bell, the pastor of the 10,000-member Mars Hill Bible Church in Grand Rapids, Mich., lays out the premise of his book while the video cuts away to an artist's hand mixing oil paints and pastels and applying them to a blank canvas.

He describes going to a Christian art show where one of the pieces featured a quote by Mohandas Gandhi. Someone attached a note saying: "Reality check: He's in hell."

"Gandhi's in hell? He is? And someone knows this for sure?" Bell asks in the video.

In the book, Bell criticizes the belief that a select number of Christians will spend eternity in the bliss of heaven while everyone else is tormented forever in hell.

"This is misguided and toxic and ultimately subverts the contagious spread of Jesus' message of love, peace, forgiveness and joy that our world desperately needs to hear," he writes in the book.

For many traditional Christians, though, Bell's new book sounds a lot like the old theological position of universalism — a heresy for many churches, teaching that everyone, regardless of religious belief, will ultimately be saved by God. And that, they argue, dangerously misleads people about the reality of the Christian faith.

"I just felt like on every page he's trying to say 'It's OK,'" said Southern Baptist Seminary President Albert Mohler at a forum last week on Bell's book held at the Louisville institution. "And there's a sense in which we desperately want to say that. But the question becomes, on what basis can we say that?"

Bell argues that hell has assumed an outsize importance in Christian teaching, considering the word itself only appears in the New Testament about 12 times, by his count.

"For a 1st-century Jewish rabbi, where you go when you die wasn't the most pressing question," Bell told The Associated Press. "The question was how can you enter into the shalom and peace of God right now, this day."

Bell denies he's a universalist, and his exact beliefs on what happens to people after death are hard to pin down, but he argues that such speculation distracts people from an urgent point. In his telling, hell is something freely chosen that already exists on earth, in everything from war to abusive relationships.

The near-relish with which some Christians stress the torments of hell, Bell argues, keep many believers needlessly afraid of a loving God, and repel potential Christians who might otherwise be curious about the faith's teachings.

"The heart of the Christian story is that God is love," he said. "But when you hear the word 'Christian,' you don't necessarily think 'Oh, sure, those are the people who don't stop talking about God's love.' Some other things would come to mind."

Ancient debate

About the only thing everyone agrees on is that this is not a new debate in Christianity. It stretches to antiquity, when Christianity was a persecuted sect in the Roman Empire, and the third century theologian Origen developed a theory that contemporary critics charged would mean that everyone, even the devil himself, would ultimately be saved. Church leaders eventually condemned ideas they attributed to Origen, but he has had a lasting influence across the Roman Catholic, Orthodox and Protestant traditions.

Those traditions often disagree, even internally, on what awaits souls after death. The Catholic Church, which has a formal process for identifying souls in heaven through canonization, pointedly refrains from saying that anyone is without a doubt in hell. Protestants reject the concept of purgatory, in which sins can be atoned for after death, but disagree on other questions. The lack of consensus is enabled partly by ambiguities in the Bible.

Evangelical opposition to Bell is exemplified in a succinct tweet from prominent evangelical pastor John Piper: "Farewell, Rob Bell."

Page Brooks, a professor at the New Orleans Baptist Theological Seminary, thinks Bell errs in a conception of a loving God that leaves out the divine attributes of justice and holiness.

"It's love, but it's a just love," Brooks said. "God is love, but you have to understand you're a sinner and the only way to get around that is through Christ's sacrifice on the cross."

Making his new belief public is both liberating and a little frightening for Holtz, even though his doubts about traditional doctrines on damnation began long before he heard about Rob Bell's book.

A married Navy veteran with five children, Holtz spent years trying to reconcile his belief that Jesus Christ's death on the cross redeemed the entire world with the idea that millions of people — including millions who had never even heard of Jesus — were suffering forever in hell.

"We do these somersaults to justify the monster god we believe in," he said. "But confronting my own sinfulness, that's when things started to topple for me. Am I really going to be saved just because I believe something, when all these good people in the world aren't?"

Gray Southern, United Methodist district superintendent for the part of North Carolina that includes Henderson, declined to discuss Holtz's departure in detail, but said there was more to it than the online post about Rob Bell's book.

"That's between the church and him," Southern said.Church members had also been unhappy with Internet posts about subjects like gay marriage and the mix of religion and patriotism, Holtz said, and the hell post was probably the last straw. Holtz and his family plan to move back to Tennessee, where he'll start a job and maybe plant a church.

"So long as we believe there's a dividing point in eternity, we're going to think in terms of us and them," he said. "But when you believe God has saved everyone, the point is, you're saved. Live like it."

Follow Up On Rob Bell, Heretic Pastor

2011-03-21T14:25:00.002-05:00

Bell claims that he is not a "Universalist" so I am intrigued to see what the controversy is. (Also, who cares if he wears black - since when are colors evil?) I admit I ordered the book and will write some thoughts on it as I read it.

Another interesting TIME interview with a Bishop - Christians Wrong About Heaven, Says Bishop

It is a blessed thing that we live in an age where we don't get burned at the stake for such progressive thoughts : )

"Versions of Hell" (Or, My Audio Documentary)

2011-03-10T10:16:00.001-06:00

I recently took an Audio Documentary class as part of my graduate work. I was able to choose the topic for my final audio piece and so I chose to interview people of differing beliefs to see whether the traditional ideas of hell still resonated with them. Narrating the piece, I talk to an atheist, a Muslim, a Jew, a Catholic, and a Christian Universalist with the underlying attempt at sound production. Here it is...all 10 minutes of it.

Love Wins

2011-03-09T15:45:00.002-06:00

Here is a trailer that Pastor Rob Bell created about what got him thinking about Universalism. It is worth watching even if one has zero intentions of buying his book.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/mpd/permalink/mKIQXLZCEUP6J/ref=ent_fb_link

The Real Time Evolution of the Bible

2011-03-02T12:16:00.000-06:00

Snip here. Lose that. Add this. The last time I checked, the further away from the ORIGINAL translation a message deviates, the more abberrated and "man-made" it becomes.

More poetic? Before you know it Jesus will be delivering lines in Haiku format. This is dangerous stuff. And over what appears to be superfluous issues.

It is stated in this article: "Fifty scholars and translators, linguistics experts, theologians and five bishops spent 17 years on the project." Yes, and no doubt they were hired by the church and discreetly told to make sure all is kept in line with the standard dogma. I would bet a year's salary on it.

It is also stated: "We needed a new translation because English is a living language," Hello! The bible was not written in English. English may evolve (or devolve if you talk to any English teachers), but the message in the bible SHOULD NOT. Before you know it they will have versions of the bible written in leetspeak, OMG LOL.

If anything, the bible should be ADDED to. I'm talking the lost gnostic gospels left out at the direction of a council of men. Put back in the Gospel of Thomas, the Gospel of Judas...and the Gospel of Mary, among others. Ah, I dream. I dream. The Catholic world would be flipped upside down if it read into any sort of anti-centralized church talk (Gospel of Thomas) and feminism (Gospel of Mary) from these original texts.

Instead they'll hem and haw over the word "booty".

God help us all.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bishops boot 'booty' from revised Bible

By Cathy Lynn Grossman, USA TODAY - 3/2/11
Original Source Link

The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops has ordered up a new translation of the Bible, one it says is more accurate, more accessible and more poetic.

Now "booty," a word that sets off snickers in Sunday school, will be replaced by the "spoils" of war when the newest edition of the New American Bible, the English-language Catholic Bible, comes out on Ash Wednesday, March 9.

"We needed a new translation because English is a living language," says retired auxiliary bishop of Milwaukee Richard Sklba, part of the review and editing team.

Fifty scholars and translators, linguistics experts, theologians and five bishops spent 17 years on the project. They were immersed in original manuscripts, the Dead Sea Scrolls and archaelogy findings unearthed since research behind the current text, published in 1970.

While Catholics may read from any of two dozen English translations, the New American Bible is the one owned by U.S. owned by U.S. bishops for prayer and study.

Fellow Heretics In the News

2011-03-01T15:28:00.002-06:00

Good for Rob. As a pastor, it must be a risky move to declare that God is so much more loving than the human attributes S/he has been assigned for centuries. It turns peoples' worlds upside down: imagine, that - a God whose Love outweighs (or at the VERY least, balances) their Vengeance! (And here, many will exclaim 'rubbish'!)

I recently interviewed a Catholic man who holds a PhD in theological ethics. He reminded me that 'heretic' simply means "other thinking" and the word is so much less scary than the Exorcist-like connotations it seems to portray. These days saying "heretic" is not coupled with an audible gasp. I think most people are...heretics in one way or another. I've even made myself a t-shirt that says "HERETIC" on the front and on the back is "The power of Christ compels me." (I also cite the exact passage from Proverbs).

There are two things missing from this blog post that I wished they would have touched upon:

1) Logic: Christians believe that Jesus died to save the world. If you have to save yourself by believing then the crucifixion exercise was a failure.

2) Theological Origins: I wish they would have stated that the early church (pre-5th century) WAS largely universalist: the church was MORE peaceful; a suffering servant with a focus on the LOVE of God. Enter the Latin translations of scripture, mix in the Council of Nicae and then the church transformed into a violent soldier of inquisition. The difference of a knife turning from a tool into a weapon.

I applaud this man. I think once your eyes are open to The Good News (like mine thankfully were). You see each person as a precious gift regardless of their beliefs. You don't pity and compete with whose beliefs are right or wrong. You don't feel the haughtiness that comes with traditional Christian self-righteousness. All are equal and all are loved.

And how that logic translates into "God mockery" is a mystery to me.

----------------------------------

Christian author's book sparks charges of heresy

By Eric Marrapodi, CNN Belief Blog Co-Editor

Original Source Link

Rob Bell, a pastor and author who has achieved rock star status in the Christian world, is preaching a false gospel, his critics say. And some of those critics are Christian rock stars in their own right. The pastor of Mars Hill Bible Church in Grand Rapids, Michigan, Bell has authored a book called Love Wins: A Book About Heaven, Hell, and the Fate of Every Person Who Ever Lived, which ignited a firestorm of controversy over the weekend, weeks before it arrives in bookstores. On Saturday, in a blog post on the popular Christian website The Gospel Coalition, Justin Taylor blasted Bell's new book, out March 29, for teaching "false doctrine": I’m glad that Rob Bell has the integrity to be lay his cards on the table about universalism. It seems that this is not just optimism about the fate of those who haven’t heard the Good News, but (as it seems from below) full-blown hell-is-empty-everyone-gets-saved universalism. Universalism, in its broadest terms, preaches that everyone goes to heaven and that there is no hell. Critics say it represents a break from traditional Christianity, which they say holds that heaven and hell are very real places. In most Christian circles, universalism is a dirty word. Taylor's post was quickly tweeted by several prominent pastors, including John Piper and Mark Driscoll, connected to the Gospel Coalition, a coalition of theologically conservative evangelical churches, and a full-blown theological controversy was on. By Monday, Taylor's response post had racked up a quarter million hits. Other bloggers, meanwhile, are calling Bell an outright heretic. Bell is not the first prominent Christian pastor to be recently accused of wading into theologically troubled waters. Bishop Carlton Pearson, once a mentee of famed Pentecostal televangelist Oral Roberts, has been run out of two churches and branded a heretic for preaching what he says is a gospel of inclusion with broad universalist themes. Last year, Brian McLaren – a popular Christian author and a former pastor - was accused of breaking with Christian orthodoxy and delving headlong into universalism in his book A New Kind of Christianity. But it's rare that theological arguments become top ten trending topics on Twitter, as Rob Bell did on Saturday. “To be honest, it was a pretty rough weekend,” Taylor said in a phone interview. The 34-year-old heads the editorial content for Crossway, a Christian publishing company in Wheaton, Illinois. Taylor he says his blog expresses his personal opinion not the opinion of the coalition. "We’re talking about the big things here, things that have been historically defined as orthodox, " he said. "I have a high degree of confidence in what God is saying and what we can understand." Though many things that separate Catholics, Protestants, and Orthodox Christians, “this isn’t one of them," Taylor said. "We’ve historically agreed on many things, the person of Christ, heaven and hell. This isn’t a peripheral academic debate. What Rob Bell is talking about gets to the heart of Christianity.” Taylor has not read Bell's forthcoming book in its entirety. His blog post was in response to the description released by Bell publisher HarperOne and a promotional video that features Bell. "Rob Bell hasn’t sinned against me personally,” Taylor said, which is why he did not go to Bell before making his comments public. Instead, Taylor said, Bell's book represents a clear example of false teaching. In the promotional video Bell refers to the nonviolent Indian independence leader Mahatma Gandhi, a Hindu, and asks, "Gandhi's in hell? He is?" "And someone knows this for sure?" Bell continues. "Will billions and billions of people burn forever in hell? And if that's the case how do you become one of the few? " The video follows a trend in Bell's career as a pastor: he has long asked tough theological questions and challenged traditional answers. The short promotional video raises lots of questions without offering definitive answers. "What we believe about heaven and hell is incredibly important because it exposes what we believe about who God likes," Bell says in it. " The good news is that love wins." Those lines raised eyebrows for Taylor and others. "It is not preaching the gospel as found in the New Testament," Taylor said. "The New Testament is pretty clear if someone preaches a false gospel… that we are to reject that and have nothing to do with them." For all his hipster leanings - including black rimmed glasses - Bell has a traditional pedigree. He went to Wheaton College, the Harvard of Christian schools, and later graduated from Fuller Theological Seminary with a Master of Divinity. But the Mars Hill Bible Church, which Bell founded, is not attached to any denomination. Were it attached to one - the Presbyterian or Catholic church, say - his book and video could raise eyebrows in the hierarchy and might lead to a church trial that could result in Bell's expulsion. "A larger denomination would take his credentials and excommunicate him like they did to me,” Bishop Pearson told CNN. By Sunday evening, Pearson was getting sent articles about the Bell flap. He said it reminded him of his days as a charismatic leader of a big church in the largest Pentecostal denomination. His questioning of hell from the pulpit led to his ouster. "What happened to me is happening to Rob Bell," Pearson said. "If you denounce hell, it's like you are denouncing God. You’re going to be called a heretic." “I thought my people loved me and would walk through the valley of the shadow of death with me, but they didn’t,” Pearson said. Bell's church did not respond to requests for an interview. His Twitter feed has been silent since he posted about writing a piece for CNN's Belief Blog a few weeks ago. His publicist at HarperOne said he would not be doing publicity until his book hits shelves.

Posted by: Eric Marrapodi - CNN Belief Blog Co-Editor

What Would The AntiChrist Do?

2011-02-25T12:04:00.000-06:00

I would be a broken record to go over this topic again, but there was a sentence in this article that especially struck me as horrific and unthinkable. So much so that I felt a little queasy. Here is that sentence:

"In one case in which an African sister was forced to have an abortion [by a priest], she died during the operation and her aggressor led the funeral mass."

As I shake my head all I can say is:

WHAT THE FUCK!?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Vatican confirms report of sexual abuse and rape of nuns by priests in 23 countries

Original Source Link
By Frances Kennedy in Rome
Independent.co.uk
Wednesday, 21 March 2001

The Catholic Church in Rome made the extraordinary admission yesterday that it is aware priests from at least 23 countries have been sexually abusing nuns. The Catholic Church in Rome made the extraordinary admission yesterday that it is aware priests from at least 23 countries have been sexually abusing nuns. Most of the abuse has occurred in Africa, where priests vowed to celibacy, who previously sought out prostitutes, have preyed on nuns to avoid contracting the Aids virus. Confidential Vatican reports obtained by the National Catholic Reporter, a weekly magazine in the US, have revealed that members of the Catholic clergy have been exploiting their financial and spiritual authority to gain sexual favours from nuns, particularly those from the Third World who are more likely to be culturally conditioned to be subservient to men. The reports, some of which are recent and some of which have been in circulation for at least seven years, said that such priests had demanded sex in exchange for favours, such as certification to work in a given diocese. In extreme instances, the priests had made nuns pregnant and then encouraged them to have abortions. The US article was based on five documents, which senior women from religious orders and priests have presented to the Vatican over the past decade. They describe a particularly bad situation in Africa. In a continent devastated by Aids, nuns, along with early adolescent girls, are perceived by some as safe sexual targets. The reports said that the church authorities had done little to tackle the problem. The Vatican reports cited countless cases of nuns forced to have sex with priests. Some were obliged to take the pill, others became pregnant and were encouraged to have abortions. In one case in which an African sister was forced to have an abortion, she died during the operation and her aggressor led the funeral mass. Another case involved 29 sisters from the same congregation who all became pregnant to priests in the diocese. The reports said that the cultures in some African countries made it almost impossible for a young woman to disobey an older man, especially one seen as spiritually superior. There were cases of novices who applied to their local priest or bishop for certificates of good Catholic practice that were required for them to pursue their vocation. In return they were made to have sex. Some incidents of sexual abuse allegedly took place almost within the Vatican walls. Certain unscrupulous clerics took advantage of young nuns who were having trouble finding accommodation, writing their essays and funding their theological studies. Forced to acknowledge the problem, the Vatican has tried to play down its gravity. In a statement issued yesterday the Pope's official spokesman, Joaquin Navarro Valls, said: "The problem is known and involves a restricted geographical area. Certain negative situations must not overshadow the often heroic faith of the overwhelming majority of religious, nuns and priests". One of the most comprehensive documents was compiled by Sister Maura O'Donohue, an Aids co-ordinator for Cafod, the London-based Catholic Fund for Overseas Development. She noted that religious sisters had been identified as "safe" targets for sexual activity. She quotes a case in 1991 of a community superior being approached by priests requesting that the nuns be made available to them for sexual favours. "When the superior refused the priests explained they would otherwise be obliged to go to the village to find women and might thus get Aids."Sister O'Donohue said her initial reaction to what she was told by her fellow religious "was one of shock and disbelief at the magnitude of the problem". While most of the abuse happened in African countries, Sister O'Donohue reported incidents in 23 countries including India, Ireland, Italy, the Philippines and the United States. She heard cases of priests encouraging the nuns to take the pill telling them it would prevent HIV. Others "actually encouraged abortion for the sisters" and Catholic hospitals and medical staff reported pressure from priests to carry out terminations for nuns and other young women. O'Donohue wrote in her report how a vicar in one African diocese had talked "quite openly" about sex, saying that "celibacy in the African context means a priest does not get married, but does not mean he does not have children." The head of the Vatican congregation for Religious Life, Cardinal Martinez Somalo, has set up a committee to look into the problem. But it seems to have done little beyond "awareness raising" among bishops. More recently, in 1998, Sister Marie McDonald, mother superior of the Missionaries of Our Lady of Africa, put together a paper entitled The Problem of the Sexual Buse of African Religious in Africa and Rome. She tabled the document to the Council of 16, made up of delegates of the international association of women's and men's religious communities and the Vatican office responsible for religious life. She noted that a contributing cause was the "conspiracy of silence". When she addressed bishops on the problem, many of them felt it was disloyal of the sisters to send reports. "However, the sisters claim they have done so time and time again. Sometimes they were not well received. In some instances they are blamed for what happened. Even when they are listened to sympathetically nothing much seems to be done" One of the most tragic elements that emerges is the fate of the victims. While the offending priests are usually moved or sent away for studies, the women are normally chased out of their religious orders, they are then either to scared to return to their families or are rejected by them. they often finished up as outcasts, or, in a cruel twist of irony, as prostitutes, making a meagre living from an act they had vowed never to do. One of the few religious in Rome willing to talk about the report was Father Giulio Albanese, of MISNA, the missionary news agency. "Missionaries are human beings, who are often living under immense psychological pressure in situations of war and ongoing violence. On one hand it's important to condemn this horror and it's important tell the truth, but we must not emphasise this at the expense of the work done by the majority, many of whom have laid down lives for witness" said Fr Albanese "The press only talks about missionaries when they are killed, kidnapped or are involved in something scandalous" he added. As the Vatican digests the unpalatable evidence of how their own priests are ruining the lives of their sisters, many Catholics hope a strong message may come from on high. With the American bishops, the Pope spoke in clear terms about paedophile priests, telling them this was a scourge that had to be faced. Some now hope that he may be equally courageous in denouncing an evil which has been covered by silence and shame for too long.

Pride

2011-02-09T11:28:00.000-06:00

I am NOT a Catholic, but I AM a liberal woman who is against capital punishment.

This acquisition also makes me proud to be a DePaul Blue Demon.

Wrong Answer

2011-01-19T08:51:00.000-06:00

Way to win over the populace, Gov. While Illinois has its flaws, I am glad I don't live in Alabama.

The separation of church and state is in place for a very good reason. Unfortunately, this separation does not always extend and resonate from the mouths of those holding public office as is the case of Alabama Gov. Robert Bentley.

The statement is divisive, judgmental and exclusionary. It is, in fact, NOT what Jesus taught:

"Judge not, and ye shall not be judged: condemn not, and ye shall not be condemned, forgive, and ye shall be forgiven."

- Luke: 6:37

"For this is the message that ye heard from the beginning, that we should love one another."

-1 John 3:11

"There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free: there is neither male nor female: for we are all one in Christ."

-Galatians 3:28

I caution against subscribing to the elitism of the traditional Christian. One has to view everyone - Jew, Muslim, Hindu, atheist - everyone - as a child of God to feel that we are all a single family on this planet.

Also, U.S. politicians have a great knack for embarrassing themselves and everyone else.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
New Ala. gov: Just Christians are his family
By JAY REEVES, Associated Press Jay Reeves, Associated Press
Tue Jan 18, 11:39 pm ET

BIRMINGHAM, Ala. – Alabama Gov. Robert Bentley told a church crowd just moments into his new administration that those who have not accepted Jesus as their savior are not his brothers and sisters, shocking some critics who questioned Tuesday whether he can be fair to non-Christians. "Anybody here today who has not accepted Jesus Christ as their savior, I'm telling you, you're not my brother and you're not my sister, and I want to be your brother," Bentley said Monday, his inauguration day, according to The Birmingham News. The Anti-Defamation League on Tuesday called Bentley's remarks shocking."His comments are not only offensive, but also raise serious questions as to whether non-Christians can expect to receive equal treatment during his tenure as governor," said Bill Nigut, the ADL's regional director. Speaking at Dexter Avenue King Memorial Church after the official inaugural ceremony, Bentley told the crowd that he considered anyone who believed in Jesus to be his brothers and sisters regardless of color, but anyone who isn't a Christian doesn't have that same relationship to him. "If the Holy Spirit lives in you that makes you my brothers and sisters. Anyone who has not accepted Jesus, I want to be your brothers and sisters, too," Bentley said. After his speech, Bentley said he did not mean to insult anyone. Responding to questions about it, Bentley's office released a statement Tuesday saying he believes "he is the governor of all of Alabama." "The governor clearly stated that he will be the governor of all Alabamians â€” Democrat, Republican and Independent, young, old, black and white, rich and poor. As stated in his (inaugural) address, Gov. Bentley believes his job is to make everyone's lives better," the statement said. Ashfaq Taufique, president of the Birmingham Islamic Society, told The Birmingham News he wasn't sure how Bentley's remarks were intended. "Does it mean that those who according to him are not saved are less important than those who are saved?" Taufique said. "Does he want those of us who do not belong to the Christian faith to adopt his faith? That should be toned down. That's not what we need. If he means that, I hope he changes it. We don't want evangelical politicians. They can be whatever in their private life."The official with the Anti-Defamation League, which fights discrimination against Jewish people, said it sounded like Bentley was using the office of governor to advocate for Christian conversion. "If he does so, he is dancing dangerously close to a violation of the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which forbids government from promoting the establishment of any religion," Nigut said.

Westboro Bapterrorists To Strike Again!

2011-01-11T14:26:00.000-06:00

Look, I'm the first to criticize the Catholic Church. No big secret here. But I do it in the proper forum and with a decent and humanly amount of respect to those who are part of it. My family is Catholic. I go to a Catholic university which is totally progressive and mission-focused. I am surrounded by Catholicism but I can peaceably explain my stance and stand aside to let others worship as they may. I can do that and still disagree with its fundamental doctrines.

These Westboro Bapterrorists epitomize the word "AntiChrist": they are nothing like Jesus. No compassion. No humility. No decency. No mercy. And they can't ACTUALLY be serious because if they were they would know just how ass-anine they appear. They are not attracting actual thinkers to their side. I am understanding it is a group comprised of the lawyerly types who take the opportunity to sue cities for keeping them at bay during funerals. Definitely not upstanding citizens, much less human beings.

----------------------------------------------------------------
Arizona lawmakers plan to block protesters within 300 feet of funerals
By the CNN Wire Staff - January 11, 2011 1:44 p.m. EST - Source

In addition to the expected legislation, some Tucson residents are planning an "angel action" -- with 8- by 10-foot "angel wings" worn by participants to shield mourners from picketers. Angel actions were created by Coloradan Romaine Patterson, who was shocked to find the Topeka church and its neon signs outside the 1999 funeral of Matthew Shepard, a young gay man beaten and left on a fence to die in Laramie, Wyoming. "We want to surround them, in a nonviolent way, to say that our community is united," Gilmer said, who is helping organize the action. "We're a peaceful haven." Gilmer added, "You don't mess with Tucson," describing it as "a little dot of blue in a sea of red." But political persuasions don't matter, she said. Republicans, Democrats, independents, right, left and center -- they've all offered their support. Forty-two people have signed up on a Facebook page called "Build Angel Wings for the Westboro Funeral Counter-Protest and Meeting," and more than 4,500 have signed up on another page to "Show Support for the Families of the Tucson Shooting Victims." Jeff Rogers, chairman of the Pima County Democratic Party, said Tuesday that his organization as well as the local Republican Party also will ask people to line the funeral routes to form a barricade if the church follows through on its planned protest. "People, businesses, they're all donating material and money to build the angel wings," Gilmer said, adding that people are giving to a fund to help pay for services for the shooting victims. Chelsea Cohen, a 20-year-old senior at the University of Arizona who launched the "Show Support" Facebook page, said she never expected such a response. "Once I heard that the Westboro Baptist Church was coming, I felt like something should be done to show support for the families," she said. "I don't have any experience in organizing these things. I thought I might get 50 to 100 people." Cohen said she thinks many who signed up on the Facebook page will be there "in spirit" on Thursday when mourners gather for the funeral of Christina, who was born September 11, 2001. But she added that Tucson is an active town and the response isn't likely to be small. "This isn't a counterprotest," she said. "We wanted it to show support for the families and to show that Tucson is there with love and support." The groups don't want to interfere with the funeral in any way, Cohen said. "We plan on being completely silent, and we're asking people not to bring signs or make comments about the Westboro Baptist Church," she said. The angels will be doing the same thing. "We're going to silently stand there so people can mourn the death of a 9-year-old girl who died in a senseless tragedy," Gilmer said. Cohen said several groups are planning to be at the funeral to show their support, and there is an effort afoot to bring them all together "into one group so we can all be on the same page." "I hope that everyone there can convey the peaceful message that we want to convey, she said And if the church picketers persist, the silent supporters will be on hand for the funerals of U.S. District Judge John Roll, Gabriel Zimmerman, Dorothy Morris, Dorwin Stoddard and Phyllis Schneck, the other five victims of Saturday's shooting. Giffords, who was shot in the head and is in critical condition, and 13 other people were wounded. Westboro Baptist Church, founded by its spiritual leader, Fred Phelps, and run mostly by family members, did not respond to a request for an interview in time for this article. But a flier released by the church about the picket targets the Roman Catholic Church because Christina and her family were members. "God hates Catholics!" the flier, posted on the church's website, says. "God calls your religion 'vain,' as it's empty of His truth; you worship idols!"

A Gesture of Goodwill

2011-01-07T13:02:00.000-06:00

This is good news. Very good . It indicates the early construction of a bridge of understanding and reason between two different religions whose fundamental value of peace is acknowledged. Amen!

What is a Copt, you ask?

Copts are Egyptians whose ancestors embraced Christianity in the early centuries after Christ. Copts in Egypt constitute the largest Christian community in the Middle East, as well as the largest religious minority in the region.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

Egypt Muslims to act as "human shields" at Coptic Christmas Eve mass

January 6, 2011 - View Source

Coptic Churches around the country expect an influx of Egyptian Muslims to share with the country's Christians their Christmas Eve mass.

“Although 2011 started tragically, I feel it will be a year of eagerly anticipated change, where Egyptians will stand against sectarianism and unite as one,” Father Rafaeil Sarwat of the Mar-Mina church told Ahram Online. The Coptic priest was commenting on the now widespread call by Muslim intellectuals and activists upon Egyptian Muslims at large to flock to Coptic churches across the country to attend Coptic Christmas Eve mass, to show solidarity with the nation's Coptic minority, but also to serve as "human shields" against possible attacks by Islamist militants. Mohamed Abdel Moniem El-Sawy, founder of El-Sawy Culture Wheel was among the promiment Muslim cultural figures who first floated the bold initiative. “This is it. It is time to change and unite,” asserted journalist Ekram Youssef, another notable sponsor of the intiative, in a telephone interview with Ahram Online. She added that although it is the government’s responsibility to act and find solutions to bring an end to such violations, "it is time for Egyptian citizens to act to revive the true meaning of national unity." Following last year's Coptic Christmas Eve attack on congregants as they left their church in the Upper Egyptian city of Naga Hamady, Youssef created the crescent and cross logo with the slogan “A nation for all” - that was adopted during the past couple of days by many of Egypt’s 4 million Facebook users as their profile picture. Mariam Yassin, a 24 year old video editor, will take Thursday off to travel to Alexandria to attend the mass at the Two Saints Church. “I am not going as a representative of any religion. I am supporting all those who died as a result of ignorance.” Yassin’s friend, Mariam Fekry, was killed along with her mother, sister and aunt in the Two Saints Church attack. “I feel great sympathy for her family’s loss, yet I don’t feel that as a Muslim I should apologize on the behalf of murderers.” Yassin added. On the other hand, Fatima Mostafa, a 40 year old house wife, will join Copts tomorrow to show that Muslims feel their sorrow. “I want to show the world that Islam is a religion of peace and that such attacks are nothing more than a result of poverty, ignorance and oppression.” While the reasons they cite for doing so may vary, many Egyptian Muslims are rallying around the idea of acting to protect their fellow citizens. “I know it might not be safe, yet it’s either we live together, or we die together, we are all Egyptians,” Cherine Mohamed, a 50 year old house wife said. For Youssef, Egyptians should attend regardless of their faith as “we all have Christians as part of our family. I am a Muslim but I’m sure my great grandfather was a Christian.” An engineer who wanted to remain anonymous stated that he was looking forward to tomorrow: “I was a Christian and I’m a Muslim now, I want my kids to go to church to realize that both religions are similar; we have one God, and both holy books stress peace and the welfare of the society at large.” The goodwill has been well received by the Coptic Church, and Coptic priests have been expressing their pleasure that Muslims intend to join them at tomorrow’s mass. Some churches have already put up banners welcoming Muslims to their celebration of the birth of Jesus. Some fear the initiative will be thwarted, however. “I’m filled with happiness, I feel it will become a national celebration, yet I fear that police won’t allow Muslims to attend the mass,” Ashraf Rasmy, a Coptic volunteer worker said. Nevertheless, Muslims and Copts are looking forward to tomorrow evening with all that it might bring. Amani Ramsis, a volunteer worker, remains defiant: “It is an anticipated celebration for all Egyptians, whether we live or die, we will never stop celebrating the birth of Jesus, and no one can bury our joy and unity.”

http://english.ahram.org.eg/News/3216.aspx

Sad Start to 2011

2011-01-04T15:18:00.002-06:00

Happy New Year, everyone. Hopefully toward the end of this year I'll have more time to write after I finish grad school.

This is a very sad way to begin 2011, however, nothing is as sad as the betrayal of the trusting by the trusted -- especially the molestation and abuse of deaf children by Lawrence Murphy.

Yeah, keep cheerleading the celibacy. More and more it seems that those born with a d*** always end up using it one way or another, don't they? It isn't a question of its use but rather how long they can keep their doins' under wraps. Wonder why that is. Maybe this will be some sort of revelation to the CC in 2011.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Abusive priest suits force archdiocese to file for bankruptcy
By Richard Allen Greene, CNN - 1/4/11 - Source

The Catholic Archdiocese of Milwaukee is filing for bankruptcy protection, it announced Tuesday, citing the cost of lawsuits filed against priests by victims of sexual abuse. "This action is occurring because priest-perpetrators sexually abused minors," the archdiocese said in a statement announcing it was filing for Chapter 11 protection. Milwaukee was home to Father Lawrence Murphy, who was accused of molesting as many as 200 deaf boys at St. John's School for the Deaf over the course of decades. He resigned from the post in 1974 and died in 1998. One of his alleged victims attempted to sue the Vatican to force it to release the names of thousands of Catholic priests against whom credible accusations have been filed. The Vatican said the suit had no merit. Arthur Budzinski, a deaf man who said he was sexually assaulted and raped by Murphy, talked about the abuse in a news conference about the lawsuit last year. He said the priest "may have stolen our bodies," but higher clerics such as cardinals, archbishops and the pope "stole our voices." He made his comments in sign language and his daughter, Gigi, interpreted his words. The archdiocese has failed to reach an out-of-court settlement with victims, and a court ruled in November that insurance companies were not required to help it pay off abuse claims, it said. That forced it to file for bankruptcy protection, it said. It said it had two goals: "fairly" compensating victims and carrying on its "essential ministries." But a lawyer representing victims rejected the explanation. "The reality is that this is being done for one reason - to hide the names of those who have offended kids and those that have covered it up in the archdiocese for years," said Jeff Anderson, who represents 23 victims. But bankruptcy will only delay the process, not stop it, he argued, saying other diocese had also filed for protection. "In all instances it has caused delays but ... never succeeded in avoiding the public disclosure of some of their crimes," he told CNN. The head of a victims' group blasted the decision to file for bankruptcy. "It's always distressing when supposed 'shepherds' act like callous CEOs," said David Clohessy of the Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests. "This is about protecting church secrets, not church assets. The goal here is to prevent top church managers from being questioned under oath about their complicity, not 'compensating victims fairly,'" he told CNN. Milwaukee becomes at least the ninth American diocese to file for bankruptcy protection since 2004, according to BishopAccountability.org, a database of publicly reported information about abuse allegations.

CNN's Alan Duke and Hada Messia contributed to this report.

Hippocratic Oaths vs. Team Hypocrisy

2010-12-22T08:47:00.004-06:00

A friend pointed me to this article. It demonstrates the dangers and alienating nature of being absolutist as the Catholic Church does here. It appears (as per usual) that the CC cares more about "getting here" and less about "being here". The stringent unbending dogma (mind you, not found verbatim in the bible whatsoever) that these "holy" men uphold with regards to abortion - nay, ACTUALLY SAVING A WOMAN'S LIFE THROUGH ABORTION - leads me to believe that they are trying to sabotage the future of the Church as well as solidify their archaic misogynistic rule over women. (Perhaps they hoped the baby would be born male, instantly superior to its lowly female mother and deserving of the trade-off of her life for his?)

When "Bishop" Olmstead becomes an M.D. and can genuinely and legitimately speak about the dignity and treatment of a patient, then maybe I'll listen to what he has to say. Until then I think not. And kudos to that hospital for continuing to operate as a Catholic institution regardless of being officially ousted by The Boys Club. That is a mature and noble establishment who can simply sniff and continue on their way, providing services to those in need. Like Jesus did.

And one more thing: Merry Christmas, everyone. Remember that Church is NOT the reason for the season - Jesus Christ is. And they are so very different ideas.

---------------------------------------------------------
Hospital loses Catholic status over ‘abortion’

By AMANDA LEE MYERS Dec 22, 2010 02:33AM
Source: http://www.suntimes.com/2971201-417/hospital-catholic-save-joseph-decision.html

PHOENIX — The Roman Catholic Diocese of Phoenix stripped a major hospital of its affiliation with the church Tuesday because of a surgery that ended a woman’s pregnancy to save her life. Bishop Thomas Olmsted called the 2009 procedure an abortion and said St. Joseph’s Hospital and Medical Center — recognized internationally for its neurology and neurosurgery practices — violated ethical and religious directives of the national Conference of Catholic Bishops. “In the decision to abort, the equal dignity of mother and her baby were not both upheld,” Olmsted said at a news conference announcing the decision. “The mother had a disease that needed to be treated. But instead of treating the disease, St. Joseph’s medical staff and ethics committee decided that the healthy, 11-week-old baby should be directly killed.”

Linda Hunt, president of St. Joseph’s, said doctors performed a necessary procedure on a patient who was getting worse by the minute and was in imminent danger of death. “If we are presented with a situation in which a pregnancy threatens a woman’s life, our first priority is to save both patients. If that is not possible, we will always save the life we can save, and that is what we did in this case,” Hunt said. “Morally, ethically, and legally, we simply cannot stand by and let someone die whose life we might be able to save.”

St. Joseph’s does not receive direct funding from the church, but in addition to losing its Catholic endorsement, the 697-bed hospital will no longer be able to celebrate Mass and must remove the Blessed Sacrament from its chapel. Hunt said the hospital will comply with Olmsted’s decision but it will continue to operate under Catholic guidelines. “We will continue in the Catholic heritage through words and deeds,” she said. “We have removed the Blessed Sacrament from our tabernacle, we will have no Masses, but priests will see patients. We are still a hospital.” The woman who had the procedure is in her 20s and had a history of abnormally high blood pressure when she learned of her pregnancy. After she was admitted to the hospital with worsening symptoms, doctors determined her risk of death was nearly 100 percent. AP

A Glimmer of Reason?

2010-11-24T10:33:00.001-06:00

I have to wonder what hidden agenda is behind the sudden change of mind, though.
Is it election season?

-------------------------------------------------------
In major shift, Vatican says condoms lesser of 2 evils when used to curb the spread of AIDS

Source: www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/sns-ap-eu-pope-condoms,0,3944129.story
NICOLE WINFIELD, VICTOR L. SIMPSON
Associated Press | 8:14 AM CST, November 24, 2010

VATICAN CITY (AP) — In a seismic shift on one of the most profound — and profoundly contentious — Roman Catholic teachings, the Vatican said Tuesday that condoms are the lesser of two evils when used to curb the spread of AIDS, even if their use prevents a pregnancy. The position was an acknowledgment that the church's long-held anti-birth control stance against condoms doesn't justify putting lives at risk. "This is a game-changer," declared the Rev. James Martin, a prominent Jesuit writer and editor. The new stance was staked out as the Vatican explained Pope Benedict XVI's comments on condoms and HIV in a book that came out Tuesday based on his interview with a German journalist. The Vatican still holds that condom use is immoral and that church doctrine forbidding artificial birth control remains unchanged. Still, the reassessment on condom use to help prevent disease carries profound significance, particularly in Africa where AIDS is rampant. "By acknowledging that condoms help prevent the spread of HIV between people in sexual relationships, the pope has completely changed the Catholic discussion on condoms," said Martin, a liberal-leaning author of several books about spirituality and Catholic teaching. The development came on a day when U.N. AIDS officials announced that the number of new HIV cases has fallen significantly — thanks to condom use — and a U.S. medical journal published a study showing that a daily pill could help prevent spread of the virus among gay men. "This is a great day in the fight against AIDS ... a major milestone," said Mitchell Warren, head of the AIDS Vaccine Advocacy Coalition. Theologians have debated for years whether it could be morally acceptable for HIV-infected people to use condoms to avoid infecting their partners. The Vatican years ago was reportedly preparing a document on the subject, but it never came out. The groundbreaking shift, coming as it does from the deeply conservative pontiff, would appear likely to restrain any public criticism from Catholic conservatives, who insisted Tuesday that the pope was merely reaffirming the church's moral teaching. Conservatives have feared that a comment like this would give support to Catholics who want to challenge the church's ban on artificial contraception in an environment where they feel they are under siege from a secular, anti-Catholic culture. George Weigel, a conservative Catholic writer, said the Vatican was by no means endorsing condom use as a method of contraception or a means of AIDS prevention. "This is admittedly a difficult distinction to grasp," he told The Associated Press in an e-mail. What the pontiff is saying is "that someone determined to do something wrong may be showing a glimmer of moral common sense by not doing that wrong thing in the worst possible way — which is not an endorsement of anything." Benedict's comments come at a time when bishops in the United States are intensely focused on upholding the strictest views of Catholic orthodoxy, emphasizing traditional marriage, natural family planning based on a woman's menstrual cycle and making abortion the most important issue. In the book, "Light of the World: The Pope, the Church and the Signs of the Times," Benedict was quoted as saying that condom use by people such as male prostitutes indicated they were moving toward a more moral and responsible sexuality by aiming to protect their partner from a deadly infection. His comments implied that he was referring primarily to homosexual sex, when condoms aren't being used as a form of contraception. However, questions arose immediately about the pope's intent because the Italian translation of the book used the feminine for prostitute, whereas the original German used the masculine. The Vatican spokesman, the Rev. Federico Lombardi, told reporters Tuesday that he asked the pope whether he intended his comments to apply only to men. Benedict replied that it really didn't matter, the important thing was that the person took into consideration the life of another. "I personally asked the pope if there was a serious, important problem in the choice of the masculine over the feminine," Lombardi said. "He told me no. The problem is this: ... It's the first step of taking responsibility, of taking into consideration the risk of the life of another with whom you have a relationship." "This is if you're a man, a woman, or a transsexual. ... The point is it's a first step of taking responsibility, of avoiding passing a grave risk onto another," Lombardi said. Those comments concluded the press conference, and Lombardi took no further questions about how broadly this interpretation could be applied. The clarification is significant. UNAIDS estimates that 22.4 million people in Africa are infected with HIV, and that 54 percent — or 12.1 million — are women. Heterosexual transmission of HIV and multiple, heterosexual partners are believed to be the major cause of the high infection rates. Benedict drew harsh criticism when, en route to Africa in 2009, he told reporters that the AIDS problem couldn't be resolved by distributing condoms. "On the contrary, it increases the problem," he said then. In Africa on Tuesday, AIDS activists, clerics and ordinary Africans applauded the pope's revised comments. "I say, hurrah for Pope Benedict," exclaimed Linda-Gail Bekker, chief executive of South Africa's Desmond Tutu HIV Foundation. She said the pope's statement may prompt many people to "adopt a simple lifestyle strategy to protect themselves." In Sierra Leone, the director of the National AIDS Secretariat predicted condom use would now increase, lowering the number of new infections. "Once the pope has made a pronouncement, his priests will be in the forefront in advocating for their perceived use of condoms," said the official, Dr. Brima Kargbo. Lombardi said Benedict knew full well that his comments would provoke intense debate. Conservative Catholics have been trying to minimize what he said since excerpts were published this weekend in the Vatican newspaper. The Rev. Tim Finnegan, a conservative British blogger, said he thought the pope's comments were unwise. "I'm sorry. I love the Holy Father very much; he is a deeply holy man and has done a great deal for the church," Finnegan said on his blog. "On this particular issue, I disagree with him." Lombardi praised Benedict for his "courage" in confronting the problem. "He did it because he believed that it was a serious, important question in the world of today," Lombardi said, adding that the pope wanted to give his perspective on the need for greater humanized, responsible sexuality. Luigi Accatoli, a veteran Vatican journalist who was on the Vatican panel that launched the book, put it this way: "He spoke with caution and courage of a pragmatic way through which missionaries and other ecclesial workers can help to defeat the pandemic of AIDS without approving, but also without excluding — in particular cases — the use of a condom," Accatoli said. The launch of the book, which includes wide-ranging comments on subjects from the sex abuse crisis to Benedict's belief that popes should resign if physically unable to carry out their mission, drew a packed audience. Making a rare appearance, Benedict's secretary, Monsignor Georg Gaenswein, sat in the front row — an indication of the event's significance. In the book, the pope reaffirms Vatican opposition to homosexual acts and artificial contraception, as well as the inviolability of marriage between man and woman. But by broadening the condom comments to also apply to women, the pope was saying that condom use is a lesser evil than passing HIV onto a partner, even when pregnancy is possible. "We're not just talking about an encounter between two men, which has little to do with procreation. We're now introducing relationships that could lead to childbirth," Martin said. Individual bishops and theologians have applied the lesser evil theory to the condom-HIV issue, but it had previously been rejected at the highest levels of the Vatican, Martin said. Monsignor Jacques Suaudeau, an expert on the Vatican's bioethics advisory board, said the pope was articulating the theological idea that there are degrees of evil. "Contraception is not the worst evil. The church does not see it as good, but the church does not see it as the worst," he told the AP. "Abortion is far worse. Passing on HIV is criminal. That is absolute irresponsibility." He said the pope broached the topic because questions about condoms and AIDS persisted, and the church's teaching hadn't been clear. There is no official Vatican policy about condoms and HIV, and Vatican officials in the past have insisted that condoms not only don't help fight HIV transmission but make it worse because it gives users a false sense of security. "This pope gave this interview. He was not foolish. It was intentional," Suaudeau said. "He thought that this was a way of bringing up many questions. Why? Because it's true that the church sometimes has not been too clear." Lombardi said the pope didn't use the technical terminology "lesser evil" in his comments because he wanted his words to be understood by the general public. Vatican officials, however, said that was what he meant. "The contribution the pope wanted to give is not a technical discussion with scientific language on moral problems," Lombardi said. "This is not the job of a book of this type."

Feminism Defined

2010-11-22T12:00:00.000-06:00

I may be repeating myself, but it bears repeating. Many folks think that a feminist views women as being superior or better than men. That is just not the case.

Feminism refers to movements aimed at establishing and defending equal political, economic, and social rights and equal opportunities for women. Its concepts overlap with those of women's rights. Feminism is controversial for challenging traditions in many fields and especially for supporting shifting the political balance toward women.[citation needed] Some feminists argue that men cause and benefit from sexism. Others argue that gender, like sex, are social constructions that harm all people; feminism thus seeks to liberate men as well as women. Feminists, persons practicing feminism, can be persons of either sex. (Source: Wikipedia)

Feminism directly confronts the idea that one person or set of people [has] the right to impose definitions of reality on others. ~Liz Stanley and Sue Wise

Jesus communed with and taught women but traditional men-run Christian churches have long since perpetrated criminality that they tie to feminism -- an evil stance in their eyes...of course they would. Admission of equality would threaten their powerful jobs for which they earn a pretty penny. However, given their incorrect and stereotypical views I would say these men have a right to be scared. They could be mentally castrated by throngs of intelligent women.

"I listen to feminists and all these radical gals - most of them are failures. They've blown it. Some of them have been married, but they married some Casper Milquetoast who asked permission to go to the bathroom. These women just need a man in the house. That's all they need. Most of the feminists need a man to tell them what time of day it is and to lead them home. And they blew it and they're mad at all men. Feminists hate men. They're sexist. They hate men - that's their problem." ~Reverend Jerry Falwell

"[Feminism is] a socialist, anti-family, political movement that encourages women to leave their husbands, kill their children, practice witchcraft, destroy capitalism and become lesbians." ~Pat Robertson

Two Steps Back

2010-11-17T12:23:00.000-06:00

I happened to see these two articles the same day and immediately thought "two steps back". There is no-to-negative progress being made in Catholicism (at least in the U.S.) in terms of social, spiritual and theological enlightenment. Both of these news articles highlight how the Catholic conservatives are clinging, white-knuckled, to the version of their religion that has not yet matured, forcing out anyone who votes for change and mercy. Heck, the C.C. hasn't even hit puberty yet. They are even going so far as to revive a dangerous literalistic Dark Ages tradition.

The harder they struggle, the tighter that roap gets.

Step 1.

New York cleric picked to head U.S. bishops after conservatives hammer top candidate

AP - November 16, 2010, 11:00 AM

BALTIMORE -- In an upset, New York Archbishop Timothy Dolan elected president today of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, defeating a vice president who had been widely expected to win the job. It is the first time since the 1960s that a sitting vice president was on the ballot for president and lost. It follows protests by some conservative Catholics against the vice president, Tucson Bishop Gerald Kicanas. Dolan received 54 percent of the vote to 46 percent for Kicanas on the third round of balloting. Kicanas was vice president for a three-year term which ends this week. Dolan's surprise victory comes at a time when church leaders are divided over how best to uphold Roman Catholic orthodoxy. A growing number of bishops have taken a more aggressive approach, publicly denying Holy Communion to Catholic politicians who support abortion rights, warning Catholic voters they should never vote for a candidate who supports abortion rights under any circumstances and reining in prominent dissenters in their dioceses. Kicanas has not denied Communion to any Catholic politicians and rejected calls to punish the president of the University of Notre Dame for honoring President Barack Obama, who supports abortion rights. Kicanas instead urged bishops and Catholic university presidents to start a discussion about their differences. Partly because of Kicanas' approach, he was pilloried in the days leading up to the vote by right-wing Catholic bloggers, who urged readers to send protest faxes and leave messages for bishops at the hotel where they are meeting. Dolan also does not outright deny the sacrament to dissenting Catholic lawmakers, but he is seen as an outspoken defender of church orthodoxy in a style favored by many theological conservatives.

Step 2.

Catholic Bishops: More Exorcists Needed
Rachel Zoll, AP Religion Writer - Friday, November 12, 2010

NEW YORK -- Citing a shortage of priests who can perform the rite, the nation's Roman Catholic bishops are holding a conference on how to conduct exorcisms. The two-day training, which ends Saturday in Baltimore, is to outline the scriptural basis of evil, instruct clergy on evaluating whether a person is truly possessed, and review the prayers and rituals that comprise an exorcism. Among the speakers will be Cardinal Daniel DiNardo, archbishop of Galveston-Houston, Texas, and a priest-assistant to New York Archbishop Timothy Dolan. "Learning the liturgical rite is not difficult," DiNardo said in a phone interview before the conference, which is open to clergy only. "The problem is the discernment that the exorcist needs before he would ever attempt the rite." More than 50 bishops and 60 priests signed up to attend, according to Catholic News Service, which first reported the event. The conference was scheduled for just ahead of the fall meeting of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, which starts Monday in Baltimore. Despite strong interest in the training, skepticism about the rite persists within the American church. Organizers of the event are keenly aware of the ridicule that can accompany discussion of the subject. Exorcists in U.S. dioceses keep a very low profile. In 1999, the church updated the Rite of Exorcism, cautioning that "all must be done to avoid the perception that exorcism is magic or superstition." The practice is much more accepted by Catholics in parts of Europe and elsewhere overseas. Cardinal Stanislaw Dziwisz, the longtime private secretary of Pope John Paul II, revealed a few years after the pontiff's death that John Paul had performed an exorcism on a woman who was brought into the Vatican writhing and screaming in what Dziwisz said was a case of possession by the devil. Bishop Thomas Paprocki of Springfield, Ill., who organized the conference, said only a tiny number of U.S. priests have enough training and knowledge to perform an exorcism. Dioceses nationwide have been relying solely on these clergy, who have been overwhelmed with requests to evaluate claims. The Rev. James LeBar, who was the official exorcist of the Archdiocese of New York under the late Cardinal John O'Connor, had faced a similar level of demand, traveling the country in response to the many requests for his expertise. The rite is performed only rarely. Neal Lozano, a Catholic writer and author of the book "Unbound: A Practical Guide to Deliverance" about combatting evil spirits, said he knows an exorcist in the church who receives about 400 inquiries a year, but determines that out of that number, two or three of the cases require an exorcism. No one knows why more people seem to be seeking the rite. Paprocki said one reason could be the growing interest among Americans in exploring general spirituality, as opposed to participating in organized religion, which has led more people to dabble in the occult. "They don't know exactly what they're getting into and when they have questions, they're turning to the church, to priests," said Paprocki, chairman of the bishops' committee on canonical affairs and church governance. "They wonder if some untoward activity is taking place in their life and want some help discerning that." Many Catholic immigrants in the U.S. come from countries where exorcism is more common, although Paprocki said that was not a motivation for organizing the conference. Exorcism has deep roots in Christianity. The New Testament contains several examples of Jesus casting out evil spirits from people, and the church notes these acts in the Catholic Catechism. Whether or not individual Catholics realize it, each of them undergoes what the church calls a minor exorcism at baptism that includes prayers renouncing Satan and seeking freedom from original sin. A major exorcism can only be performed by a priest with the permission of his bishop after a thorough evaluation, including consulting with physicians or psychiatrists to rule out any psychological or physical illness behind the person's behavior. Signs of demonic possession accepted by the church include violent reaction to holy water or anything holy, speaking in a language the possessed person doesn't know and abnormal displays of strength. The full exorcism is held in private and includes sprinkling holy water, reciting Psalms, reading aloud from the Gospel, laying on of hands and reciting the Lord's Prayer. Some adaptations are allowed for different circumstances. The exorcist can invoke the Holy Spirit then blow in the face of the possessed person, trace the sign of the cross on the person's forehead and command the devil to leave. The training comes at a time when many American bishops and priests are trying to correct what they view as a lack of emphasis on the Catholic teaching about sin and evil after the Second Vatican Council, the series of meetings in the 1960s that enacted modernizing reforms in the church. Many in the American hierarchy, as well as Pope Benedict XVI, believe that the supernatural aspect of the church was lost in the changes, reducing it to just another institution in the world. A renewed focus on exorcism highlights the divine element of the church and underscores the belief that evil is real. DiNardo said some Catholics who ask for an exorcism are really seeking, "prayerful support. They're asking for formation in the faith." Still, he said sometimes the rite is warranted. "For the longest time, we in the United States may not have been as much attuned to some of the spiritual aspects of evil because we have become so much attached to what would be either physical or psychological explanation for certain phenomena," DiNardo said. "We may have forgotten that there is a spiritual dimension to people."

Running Out of Rocks

2010-11-10T14:21:00.012-06:00

Merciful? Nah. Counselor? Nah. Shepherd? Nah. Bringer of Good News? Hell Nah.

False prophet (Bishop?) Andre Leonard is just another clown at the circus.

The conservative Vatican men are running out of self-justifying rocks to throw. And the rocks are getting very ...specific. So specific, in fact, that those women who've had abortions will allegedly be greeted in the afterlife by their babies crying "momma". Really? And AIDS as God's punishment? What? Well how about cancer, then?

Please allow me to address Andre, here:

Where, in all your hellfire rhetoric, sir, is the love that Jesus taught? Where is the understanding of The Father, the gifts of The Spirit, the Mercy of the Lamb? Hope? Faith? Forgiveness? So where do you find the balls to rush to the defense of retired pedophile priests? Perhaps when you and your pedo-priests walk into the afterlife those children will be waiting for you, demanding their innocence back? What is that saying, "before attempting to remove the sliver from your brother's eye, first remove the log in your own?" In your fork-tongued vitriol, your clouded and bitter judgement of the populous which pays your bills, you greatly underestimate the love and forgiveness of God, sir. Have we forgotten what the purpose of the church is? Have you forgotten who it is who needs your counsel and understanding the most? It isn't the faithful, it is those in turmoil and spritiual conflict. They do not seek your counsel to be told that they're being punished by God or that the fetus they aborted after a rape will chide them on the other side. YOU ARE SUPPOSED TO BE A BEACON OF TRUST AND HOPE. But so far you've accomplished the task of being a hovering cuppola of doom. And lower your voice and strengthen your argument. Please cite in your holy book where it says that these things will happen? You absolutely cannot. It also says in the holy book NOT to say something is so if it is not. That would be lying. So you sir, are a liar. A liar in expensive stoles surrounded by gold chalices which should be sold to help the needy as Jesus taught. And you should be the counselor of the poor in spirit as well. So I say with much respect to you -- what the fuck?

All I hear are the hypocritical ramblings of another Pontiff-appointed AntiChrist.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Conservative Belgian archbishop in eye of storm

Source: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20101110/ap_on_re_eu/eu_belgium_church_in_turmoil

AP - BRUSSELS, Belgium – He calls AIDS a form of "justice" for homosexuals and wants retired pedophile priests to go unpunished. He says women who have an abortion will be greeted in the afterlife by their unborn child crying "Momma!"

Archbishop Andre Leonard, 70, was plucked from a sleepy Belgian citadel-town by Pope Benedict XVI in January to energize the country's Roman Catholic faithful and reverse 30 years of liberalism. The appointment was in line with Benedict's policy of putting tradition-minded and conservative bishops in important dioceses.

But since taking office, Leonard's hardline views have added turmoil to a church already mired in an abuse scandal. And, privately, some Vatican officials are expressing concern about an ever-worsening public relations disaster.

The controversy turned into a very public revolt last week when his spokesman resigned, saying he could no longer morally defend Leonard.

"I was his GPS for three months. But it is the driver who has his hands on the wheel. Too often, I had to recalculate the route," said Juergen Mettepenningen. He called Leonard a "loose cannon who thinks everybody else is wrong."

Leonard's views — and the way he delivers them so stridently — are riling the Catholic base, but they dovetail with church teachings that homosexual acts are "intrinsically disordered" and that women who abort babies are sinners.

Also, the Vatican admits it has no tolerance for pedophiles, but rarely subjects elderly pedophile priests to full canonical trials, instead telling them to live out their years in prayer and penance.

Bert Claerhout, editor of Church and Life, a Catholic weekly, says he has been receiving "fierce" letters of complaint from readers — and doesn't believe Leonard's views have suddenly come to the attention of the Vatican.

"The pope knew very well what he did when he appointed Leonard. He wanted someone to bring a conservative view to the church here," Claerhout said in an interview.

Two of Belgium's 10 bishops have publicly challenged Leonard. Unusually, Belgian Premier Yves Leterme, a Catholic, also condemned him. Last week, a man ran up to the archbishop during a service at Brussels' main cathedral and shoved a cherry pie in his face.

Leonard last week published a five-page response to his critics, but refused to back off from his view that AIDS is punishment for a promiscuous lifestyle. Writing on his archdiocese's Web site, he drew parallels with people who continue to smoke despite seeing clear health warnings on cigarette packs.

Leonard took charge of the Belgian church just as a long-simmering sexual abuse scandal began to surface.

In April, the then-Bishop of Bruges, Roger Vangheluwe, retired and admitted that for years he had abused a nephew. In June, police raided Leonard's offices looking for clues. There is no suggestion Leonard is involved in a coverup, but his subsequent defense of retired pedophile priests couldn't have come at a more sensitive time.

"If they are no longer priests, have no more (church) responsibilities, I doubt that taking some kind of vengeance ... is a humane solution," he said on Belgian public television in October.

"Do they really want a priest, aged 85, to be put in stocks and publicly humiliated? I think most victims don't want that."

Vatican insiders call Leonard a "very intellectual" theologian. He escaped the attention of most Belgian Catholics when, in the 1990s, he was the bishop of Namur — a city of 100,000 in the country's thinly populated south.

He holds a philosophy degree from the Leuven Catholic University and did theological studies at the Pontifical Gregorian University in Rome, a Jesuit school. He was also a member of the International Theological Commission, which then-Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger — now Pope Benedict XVI — headed as prefect of the Vatican's orthodoxy office.

He took over from Cardinal Godfried Danneels who opposed key Vatican edicts such as a ban on condoms in AIDS prevention. During his tenure, Belgium legalized euthanasia and same-sex marriages — two red-flag issues in Rome — and Danneels didn't actively try to slow down the pace of change.

Vatican officials acknowledge concern about the Belgian situation, but have refrained from comment saying they don't want to inflame an already tense situation.

Gabriel Ringlet, a former deputy dean of the Universite Catholique de Louvain, wants Leonard to resign — a highly unlikely prospect and one that would be unprecedented in Belgium.

Rita Bettens, a churchgoing Catholic, also said Leonard was causing considerable damage. "And this is not a good time for any of that," she said, referring to continuing fallout from the abuse scandal.

Further...Awake

2010-10-25T11:45:00.000-05:00

I thought this was an interesting and unsurprising article. This source is a Catholic website, and I found the candor of the author refreshing.

-------------------------------------------------------

Article: "Further Adrift"
Source: http://commonwealmagazine.org/further-adrift

Excerpt: In February 2008, the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life’s U.S. Religious Landscape Survey, based on interviews with a representative sample of thirty-five thousand adult Americans, reported that one out of every three adult Americans who were raised Catholic have left the church. If these ex-Catholics were to form a single church, they would constitute the second largest church in the nation.

Fictional Christians

2010-10-20T14:57:00.002-05:00

I've been so crazy with school. I can't believe my last post was in August. I also can't believe this headline.

Psst! Hey, Vatican, didn't you get the memo? The Simpsons aren't REAL. They're just fictional cartoons. Don't spend too much time analyzing their beliefs because there are REAL starving children dying in other countries that could really use your help.

Homer Simpson is Catholic, Vatican Paper Declares

Mon Oct 18, 10:18 pm ETLOS ANGELES (Reuters) – "The Simpsons" just got a blessing from the Vatican. The official Vatican newspaper has declared that beer-swilling, doughnut-loving Homer Simpson and son Bart are Catholics -- and what's more, it says that parents should not be afraid to let their children watch "the adventures of the little guys in yellow." "Few people know it, and he does everything to hide it. But it's true: Homer J. Simpson is Catholic", the Osservatore Romano newspaper said in an article on Sunday headlined "Homer and Bart are Catholics." The newspaper cited a study by a Jesuit priest of a 2005 episode of the show called "The Father, the Son and the Holy Guest Star". That study concludes that "The Simpsons" is "among the few TV programs for kids in which Christian faith, religion and questions about God are recurrent themes." The Simpsons pray before meals, and "in its own way, believes in the beyond," the newspaper quoted the Jesuit study as saying. It's the second time the animated U.S. TV series, which is broadcast in 90 countries, has been praised by the Vatican. But executive producer Al Jean told Entertainment Weekly on Monday he was in "shock and awe" at the latest assertion, adding that the Simpsons attend the "Presbylutheran" First Church of Springfield. "We've pretty clearly shown that Homer is not Catholic," Jean said. "I really don't think he could go without eating meat on Fridays -- for even an hour." In December 2009, the Osservatore Romano described the show as "tender and irreverent, scandalous and ironic, boisterous and profound, philosophical and sometimes even theological, nutty synthesis of pop culture and of the lukewarm and nihilistic American middle class." "The Simpsons", which introduced the catch-phrase "D'oh", is the longest-running prime-time TV series in the United States and is now in its 22nd season.

Filling the Jock Strap of Jesus

2010-08-30T13:24:00.001-05:00

Imagine God's inner dialogue: "How can I get people to listen to me and take me seriously in the Holy Land in early C.E.? I mean, unfortunately females are mostly an unheard lot at this point...I will send a part of myself in the form of a man to get peoples' attention. He will be my son and spread my word. If the role was reversed or men and women saw the equality of a future time, I'd have sent my daughter instead. And SHE would have picked 12 of her apostles (all women), no less - as people would LISTEN TO THEM!"

While smart on God's part, people misconstrue the hell out of Jesus being a man. And have to this very day.

God created man and woman in (his) image. God then, is both male and female. As an all-knowing powerful being, God is both Mother and Father.

In 2010, the article below provides a solid example of a weaksauce argument. Having a penis is irrelevant to "standing in the place of Jesus" (or maybe Wang should have said, "filling the jockstrap of Jesus".)

And Wang cites that this male domination held true in the first century as it does through the ages... then tell me, Wang, why do men not take several concubines, sacrifice goats and have incestuous relations with their daughters? Heck, it happened in the first century so why doesn't it hold true now? Real easy to pick and choose your bigotry when it benefits ye who sports a dick, isn't it?

The Bible (and hence Christianity) will only remain relevant if it can connect with the modern times in a POSITIVE and loving and peaceful way. The boys club of Rome widens that chasm year by year which is why their market share in the religious index continues to dwindle.

Women are every bit as blessed of soul and mind as men. Women can move the hearts of masses in the spirit of Christ just as much as men. And if I want to dredge up some low ball blows (no pun intended) women are physiologically less programmed for pedophilia and more emotionally in-tune to the sufferings of the world.

As Jesus was persecuted, so are women from around the world on a grand scale. In my eyes that makes women equally or even more qualified than men to be at the pulpit.

Think about it.

BONUS ROUND: Other Tidbits of Oppression

The Gospel of Mary and the Gospel of Eve conveniently did not make it into the Canonical Bible.

The 1917 Code of Canon Law in the Catholic Church mandated that women wear a veil or head covering. Men did not have to.

Catholic marriage ceremonies (depending on the priest) still insist upon, "Wives, obey your husbands." (mis-used from the New Testament letter from Paul)

Jesus hung out with with women of all persuasions, i.e. Mary Magdalene. But she gets few props.

The church has a pre-occupation with a woman's reproduction. Men? Stick it where you want. The woman is seemingly charged with all sins linked to adultery, abortion and birth control. Men seem to be off the hook with regard to responsibility.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Catholic Church defends male-only priesthood

August 30th, 2010 - Original Source Link
http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2010/08/30/catholic-church-defends-male-only-priesthood/?hpt=T2

Barring women from being Catholic priests is not the result of sexism 2,000 years ago, it's because women cannot fulfill a basic function of the priesthood, "standing in the place of Jesus," a leading British Catholic thinker argued Monday. "This teaching is not at all a judgment on women's abilities or rights. It says something about the specific role of the priest in Catholic understanding - which is to represent Jesus, to stand in his place," argued Father Stephen Wang in a statement sent out by the Catholic Bishops Conference of England and Wales. It's rare for the Catholic Church to defend its fundamental positions in this way. Wang was responding to the announcement that campaigners for female priests will plaster posters on London buses next month during the pope's visit to London. The ads read "Pope Benedict - Ordain Women Now!" and will be on 15 double-decker buses running in some of London's main tourist areas, including Parliament and Oxford Street, said Pat Brown, a spokeswoman for Catholic Women's Ordination (CWO). The group spent "in excess of 10,000 pounds" ($15,500) on the ads and is hoping donations will help make up at least part of that cost, Brown told CNN Friday. Wang rejected both the tone and the content of the ads, saying that while an atheist ad campaign last year was "hesitant and ended with gentle exhortations," this one ends "with a shout." And it's based on a fundamental misunderstanding, said Wang, the dean of studies at London's main seminary for Catholic priests, Allen Hall. Pope John Paul II declared in 1994 that the church has no authority to ordain women, a position confirmed a year later by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, who is now Pope Benedict XVI. At the time, Ratzinger was the head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, the arbiter of Catholic Church dogma. Wang called the late pope's position "surprising," saying John Paul had meant he did not have the power to change "something that has been such a fundamental part of Christian identity from the beginning." The bottom line is that Jesus chose 12 men - and no women - to be his apostles, Wang argues. The choice was "deliberate and significant, not just for that first period of history, but for every age," Wang says. Men and women are equal in Christianity, he continues, but "this does not mean that our sexual identity as men and women is interchangeable. Gender is not just an accident." He compared the role of a priest to that of an actor playing King Arthur or British soccer star Wayne Rooney in a movie. "No one would be surprised if I said I wanted a male actor to play the lead," he said, admitting the analogy was "weak." But, he said, "it shouldn't surprise us if we expect a man to stand 'in the person of Christ' as a priest, to represent Jesus in his humanity - a humanity that is not sexually neutral." The Catholic women's group says that in addition to its bus campaign, it plans to hold a vigil September 15, the day before the pope's visit, outside Westminster Cathedral. The group also plans to demonstrate at Lambeth Palace, the official London residence of the Archbishop of Canterbury - the head of the Church of England - during his meeting with the pope. And members plan to hold a banner along the route of the popemobile, the secure vehicle which carries the pope, in London. Pope Benedict plans to visit England and Scotland September 16-19. It will be the first state visit to the United Kingdom by a pope, according to the British Foreign Office. John Paul's trip in 1982 was officially a pastoral visit.

A Worthy Read

2010-08-17T12:32:00.000-05:00

On Sunday, 8-15-10, a man named Samuel Blake Ellis (the grandfather of a popular blogger I follow) passed away due to complications from Parkisons and Alzheimers at the age of 88. He wrote the following thoughts on God about 10 years ago. He was a retired Methodist minister.

This is definitely worth reading whether you agree entirely with him or not.

------------------------------------

GOD

Please do not take offense at what I am going to say. In no way do I mean to belittle your beliefs. And please don't don't worry about my "salvation," whatever that may mean to you. My beliefs really serve me well.

I am grateful that over the years I have never been looked down on for asking questions.

"When I was a child I thought like a child...". Children are apt to interpret things literally. No where is this more true than in the realm of religion. All of my playmates were from Roman Catholic families, and we were all aware that there was a difference between Catholics and Protestants.

As a child I felt I knew all about God, but as the years have gone by I find that I agree less and less with the things I've been told about God. Even as a very young person I got away from that kind of thinking, for it didn't fit with some other ideas of God that meant more to me. For example, I was taught, and I still believe, that God is Love, and that God is inextricably related to the welfare of all people. Believing that, I cannot believe that God purposely allows disasters of fire, flood, and earthquake, to say nothing of individual personal pain in the form of physical impairment, bereavement, divorce, assault, automobile accident, etc.

Another idea that I have discarded is that God is all-powerful. If God is a god of love and also all-powerful, God certainly would not cause the difficulties I've just mentioned. If God were all-powerful he would not allow them to happen. So, they must happen in spite of any power that God may have. So, for me, God cannot be both all-powerful and loving.

Take the illustration of a disaster such as an airplane crash that results in some persons dying and others surviving. When I read of parents of a survivor thanking their god for saving their beloved family member I feel like asking them, "What kind of god is this who is willing to save some people, but is unable (or unwilling) to save others?

One thing I am very sure about is that God is neither male nor female, even though I've been using the masculine pronoun for want of one that is adequate. Particularly in the last ten or fifteen years or so of my ministry I became sensitized to the alienation and hurt we males have inflicted upon women and girls by the language we use. And clergy males are no less to blame than lay men.

Once, at the beginning of a meeting of clergy, we were asked to introduce ourselves by name, and then tell what were the best or the worst things that had been part of our lives in our recent past. With a gesture that included all the people in the group, a man spoke of the love and concern he had felt recently from "all my brothers in the ministry" during his recent illness. A young female minister two seats away from him who had sent him a note of encouragement, introduced herself in turn and noted that the worst thing that had happened to her was learning just now that she was a brother of the male minister. It was said gently, and with a touch of humor, but it made very clear how thoughtless we men sometimes are.

At this point I can't resist telling you the story about a rocket that had been sent into space. It fell to earth one Sunday morning just outside a church where a service was in progress. The landing made such a noise that the congregation and minister rushed out to find the rocket stuck firmly in the ground, and there, wonder of wonders, was an angel sitting on the nose cone. When the hubbub had died down, the minister, as spokesperson, posed a question directly to the angel.

Minister: Blessed Angel, we welcome you to Earth. We are honored by your presence. We pray that you would be so kind as to answer a question that you, as a citizen of Heaven, are eminently qualified to clarify.

Angel: I am happy to be with you, and I shall try to answer your question.

Minister: We would like to know, What is God like?

Angel: (after several moments in deep thought) Well, first of all, she's black...!

And that reminds me of what a parishioner said to me when he learned that I was about to retire. Said he in a derogatory manner, "I suppose the bishop will appoint a woman to be our pastor." And, trying to answer in a light manner, I responded, "Yes, and she will probably be black." What made it interesting was that the bishop did indeed appoint a woman, and she was indeed very black.

At my final service of worship before her arrival I did something to symbolize my desire that she be welcomed warmly. I hoped also that what I did would indicate clearly that I would no longer be pastor to this congregation. At the close of the service, using appropriate words, I took off my black clerical robe and placed it upon the altar as an indication that the person who was coming would take up the robe, and with it, the ministering of the congregation that had been my responsibility until then.

PHYSICS AND THE BIBLE

The Dancing Wu Li Masters by Gary Zukav (1979, Morrill Quill Paperbacks) is a physics book dealing with subatomic physics written for the lay person, which has opened an exciting new view of creation for me and has forced me to rethink my place as one human being in the universe as well as my old ideas about god.

Writings by Carl Sagan

One of the most important ideas that has changed my religious outlook is my discovery that pure chance appears to be what decides things in the sub-atomic physical world. Of course this runs counter to the idea that God purposely directs every single thing that happens.

For me, however, it provides a satisfactory answer to the old problem of evil. That subject has puzzled and bedeviled people for centuries, and perhaps even farther back in prehistory before there were any formal theologians. There has always been a feeling on the part of humans that if they were good, however that was defined, they would be rewarded, and that if they were bad they would be punished.

In our own lives we know that this is not the way it works. Oh, we can try to rationalize by saying that in some mysterious manner it must be for the best that the mother of three little children was killed in an automobile accident. God must have had a good reason for willing, or at least allowing, that sort of thing to happen.

I don't buy that. Rabbi Kushner, in his book, When Bad Things Happen to Good People, does an excellent job of expressing how impossible it would be to respect that kind of god. Also, my own personal experience tells me quite convincingly that good people do not always receive a blessing, and bad people do not always get their just desserts.

I suppose that the ideas of heaven and hell came into being in order to explain that it would only be fair that each person get what he or she deserves If that doesn't happen while the person is alive it seems only right that it should happen in some other life beyond death. That would mean that the good people in this life would go to heaven and bad people would go to hell. That helps many people to feel better when humans don't get what they deserve-either eternal peace or eternal damnation-before they die.

I believe that fairness (justice) is not life's major operating principle. After all, what did I ever do to deserve being born into a loving family where I always had the necessities of life? What terrible thing did a child starving in Ethiopia do to deserve suffering and starvation? How is it that one child is born to an alcoholic mother who doesn't want it, and another child is born to parents who will love and nurture it to responsible adulthood?

Heaven and hell solve the problem for many people, but it doesn't for me. The best explanation I have is that such eventualities come about by chance. Which simply means that all babies are born without being consulted or having any choice in the matter.

The question, "Why me?", asked when cancer strikes, is not taken seriously by those who answer in a supercilious manner with the question, "Why not you?". I love that Old Testament character, Job, who was not patient at all (although crossword puzzles sometimes define him as the epitome of patience) with his friends who kept trying to convince him that he must have done something terribly sinful to have deserved the sorrow and pain that they thought God visited upon him. Job maintained before them and before his God that he was not guilty of anything that merited his suffering.

Many a human being has felt as Job did, and the argument that God, by inflicting pain and suffering, is merely meting out just punishment for unknown sin, is certainly not worthy of a good god. The god Job's friends believed in is not my god.

In the realm of nature, think of the fact that only one of millions of sperm cells succeeds in fertilizing an ovum, and all the rest fail. Why that particular one? Or, what about the fact that an average of only two out of some 700,000 eggs laid by a Pacific salmon ever reach maturity? Why those particular two and not some other two? Given the relevant facts, we can determine what the probabilities are for survival, but we can not say just which specific eggs will produce the survivors. We can predict that a certain number of lives will be lost in automobile accidents for every ten million miles driven, but we cannot be specific and tell by name who the victims will be.

Both fortuitous and hurtful happenings seem to be distributed by chance, and that would be very discouraging if it were not for some other important factors. In other words, if chance were the only operating power we might as well forget about justice, righteousness, and love. We could live any old way we wanted to, because nothing we could do would make a difference in the outcome. The fact is, however, that how we deal with good fortune and bad fortune does make a big difference.

I firmly believe that there is a manner of living which is exceedingly valuable, and I call that way of life Christianity. I hasten to say that I don't believe in everything that has been called Christianity. But, I do wholeheartedly believe in the kind of Christianity that is depicted in the gospels of the New Testament as they reveal the spirit of Jesus. And it is the spirit that is important to me. There are also Old Testament instances that give evidence of that spirit. I firmly believe that the spirit of goodness is not restricted to persons who call themselves Christians. Neither does it belong to any time period in history.

I know it's hard to talk about God as spirit, for spirit is something ethereal, out of reach of the five senses, and yet it's something that we human beings give life to. The idea of God as a superhuman being who is somewhat like us is very pervasive, but I don't believe that there is such a "being" beyond the lives of humans.

My God is goodness itself, a quality of spirit. The spirit I think of as my God, the essence of Goodness, lives where-and at those moments when-a human being gives life to the spirit of love. Love is only an idea until it is expressed in action by a human being; then it becomes a reality!

I don't believe in a literal heaven up in the sky or in a hell that is somewhere in the fiery bowels of the earth. I don't believe in a literal, physical, resurrection of Jesus or in a virgin birth. Some of the parishioners whom I served over the years would be distressed by those statements. I hope that they don't disturb you, but if they do, remember that you don't have to believe as I do. Every person has a right-and a duty-to hold fast his or her own beliefs. You have a right to yours whatever they may be. However, please remember that it's a sign of growth to be willing to give up even long-held beliefs in favor of new ones that you find to be more meaningful.

Religious beliefs are not simply to be mouthed; they should guide and direct personal day-to-day living. Saying we believe something, simply because we have been told by some authority that we ought to believe it, is not good enough. In our childhood we naturally take on beliefs that our parents hold. We hang on to them until our own experience gives us good reason to change them. But, to hold onto beliefs that were passed down to us when we were children if they no longer make sense is to be less than honest with ourselves.

I've heard a story, which may or may not be true, about a young wife who always cut a slice off a roast before she put it in the roasting pan. One day her husband asked why she did that. Her answer was that her mother always did it, and so it must be the right way to prepare a roast, but she agreed to ask her mother about it. When she did, her mother answered that she always cut a slice off the roast because she didn't have a roasting pan big enough for the whole thing.

There's nothing wrong with questioning custom, and there's nothing wrong with questioning our religious beliefs either. It's easy enough to question the beliefs of others, but I'm talking about our own beliefs. Those that can't stand up under our own questioning ought to be discarded, don't you think? I think that a reason some people don't have anything to do with organized religion is that they have questioned certain religious practices and beliefs and have found them wanting. The sad part is that these folks don't investigate anything else.

I'll never forget a visit I made to a man who, I was warned by well-meaning parishioners, was an atheist. In the course of our conversation he enumerated a number of things that he didn't believe. He was somewhat taken aback when I told him that I didn't believe those things either.

There's a lot of superstition in religion, but there is also much that can enrich the lives of human beings. As a result of learning about the attitude and teachings of Jesus through reading about them, and through seeing them work in the lives of others, and experiencing how they have worked in my own life when I have had the courage to practice them, I have come to embrace the following credo.

My understanding of the message of Jesus is that his God wants people to enjoy this life that they have been launched into without their consent. Jesus demonstrated how best to find that joy. Jesus likened his God to a father who loves his children. (He might have chosen a mother image, but in his day it was the father who was the person who was responsible for the family.) To have a father who loved his children in spite of their waywardness was a powerful picture illustrating the spirit he considered to be the greatest Good.

I don't see the God of Jesus as being especially interested in having people bow down before him, or having people do certain acts of kindness and mercy for his benefit. The emphasis of Jesus was not on duty to God, but rather on trying to help people discover how to live happy, valuable, satisfying, good (godly) lives-lives lived in a spirit of goodwill. Apparently Jesus felt that his God would be happy if people lived in such a way that they would be happy. That makes sense to me. After all, isn't it good when we and those we love are happy persons? Don't good parents want their children to be happy persons?.

I believe that I ought to respect all people and treat them with the kind of non-judgmental understanding that I would want to receive from them.

I believe that being good is its own reward. It is futile to "do good" for the purpose of getting a reward. Doing good, and dwelling on that goodness, is the kind of pride that breeds dissatisfaction and resentment when we don't get the recognition and praise from others that we think our moral superiority deserves. And, if I should get praise for being (or doing) good, I would probably begin to believe that I am superior to others. But, doing good and trying to be a good person simply because it is a satisfying way for me to live eliminates any need for the praise of others and allows me to move on to the next adventure with a light and happy heart.

I believe that the only person I can change is myself. If others make changes, good or bad, in their lives because they have known me, it is because they choose to do so. I have no power to coerce them into changing. Nor do I want such power, because that would make them my slaves and take away from them any joy they might find in directing their own lives.

Instead of trying to list all of the rest of the beliefs that have been meaningful to me and have helped me to have a wonderful, satisfying life, let me simply commend to you the teachings of Jesus.

For me, Jesus was not God, nor even a god (small g) but simply a man, a human being, who understood quite clearly the most satisfying way to live his human life. And, don't tell me that makes Jesus "just an ordinary human being." Just the opposite; it means that he was an extraordinary human being. His life was lived in a spirit that defines what goodness (Godliness, if you'd rather say it that way) really is.

I also want to say something about the Church. The Church is certainly imperfect. I find that there are many things in church dogma that I cannot abide. Superstition and belief in magic are still rampant. There are some people who are hard to get along with. There are, however, many church people who are the salt of the earth. And, the Church is the only institution I know which encourages and recommends to all that we search for and practice the highest qualities of human life that we can find. I owe a great deal to the Church. It has given me a wonderful opportunity to practice, in a safe setting, the kind of Christianity I have tried to live outside the Church where there's little safety.

So, to sum up, I don't know much about what or who your God is, but I have enjoyed life as a part of the Church, and have found a great deal of satisfaction in trying to live life in a spirit of goodwill. I like to think I'm getting a little better at it as time goes on.

Oh, but "What about the creation of the universe?", you ask. "Who did that?" I knew you'd be asking that, because I've asked it of myself many times. My answer at the present time is that I don't know, and it doesn't worry me one bit.

For all I know, there may not have been any beginning at all. Maybe the universe is eternal with no beginning and no ending. Our minds, as amazing and wonderful as they are, seem incapable of imagining anything that has no beginning and no ending, but that may say more about our limitations than about the reality of the universe.

So far, nobody has discovered any boundaries to the universe. New telescopes help scientists to discover galaxies and "black holes" at greater and greater distances from us. Of course, they may not even be in existence now, because of the length of time it has taken their light to reach us.

I know about the Big Bang theory, but for me that doesn't explain how the universe was created. There must have been something that BANGED! I have to admit that my mind can't fathom nothing, Anyway, what difference does it make in the way we live with other people and with our environment here on earth today?

Astronomy and astrophysics are fascinating subjects. I'd like to know more about them. And I think it's great that there are people who probe the mysteries of space and time. I respect them. But when I read about astrophysics and, at the other end of the spectrum, the world of subatomic particles, I find myself coming back to the idea that there might be no beginning or ending to what we call the universe.

But, you say, "The Bible says that 'In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth,' doesn't it?" Sure it does, and if you have to have a beginning, that may be the best way of saying it. It simply means that the person who first expressed that idea of God couldn't understand how creation could have come about. The humans he knew couldn't have created it, so he (perhaps she?) decided that a superhuman, supernatural power must have done it somehow for some unknown reason. Maybe the creator was lonely so he made people; maybe he liked color and therefore made sunsets and flowers; maybe he liked to travel so he stretched out the universe so that there would be more room. Maybe! But I see that kind of reasoning as strengthening my belief that we humans create our gods according to our own definitions of goodness.

That leads me to say a few things about the Bible. I encourage you to read the Bible as if you had never before heard of it. Read it, and pay attention to what is written there. Try to remember you're reading it as if you had never heard anything about this book. That's hard, because you have heard about it; you have heard some people say that it must be believed as the literal Word of God, and when you read that the sun stood still you ought to believe that the sun actually stopped at some point between its rising and its setting. And when you read of an axe floating in water you should believe it because it's in the Bible. But, try to read it as if you never heard that you ought to believe such things.

Notice that there are a couple of biblical stories about the beginnings of things, and that the stories don't agree. You'll find these stories in the first two chapters of the first book in the Bible. Many times in history we humans have simply attributed to a superhuman being those things that we couldn't explain.

You will find that in one place the Bible record says "They shall beat their swords into plowshares and their spears into pruning hooks", and in another place it says precisely the opposite. There will be a lot of other things that you'll read in the Bible that don't agree with each other or with scientific knowledge discovered since the writing of the Bible by humans of a bygone age. So, what are you going to do with this book of books? I suggest that you use the same methods of criticism that you'd use with any other book.

Human beings wrote what is in the Bible, and other human beings, men in council meetings, (we assume all of them were males) chose to include certain writings instead of numerous other writings that were also available. And human beings were just as fallible in making choices then as we are today.

It would be laughable, were it not so sad, that there are people who try to make Bible texts fit their pre-conceived idea that everything in the Bible is historically factual. Picture all the animal life on earth going two-by two into a big boat (the ark) to be saved from a world-wide flood that destroyed everything else. Of course no boat could be big enough to hold all that life for more than forty days and forty nights along with all the food necessary to keep them alive.

Probably most of the people who say we should believe the story as literal history don't even know that in the sixth and seventh chapters of Genesis Noah is told to take two of every kind of animal at one point while at another point there are to be seven pairs of "clean" animals and birds in the ark along with only one pair of each animal that was not considered "clean".

Please understand that I am not saying that the Bible is worthless; I am simply saying that we ought to use our intelligence and understanding of the various forms of literature we find in the Bible.

One of the reasons that I went into the ministry was because I felt that there had to be an approach to the Bible that was different from what my minster believed. He said in a sermon in my hearing that God had given us television so that we could watch the battle of Armageddon, which he interpreted as marking the end of the world. I mentioned earlier how this same minister warned teen-agers that they should never consider the idea of evolution; if they did they would not be welcome in his church.

The better business bureau tells us that if a deal looks too good to be true, it probably is; beware of it. I would say that if something you read in the Bible is too fantastic to be believed literally, it is probably not literal fact. You may read some of the teachings of Jesus in the New Testament that seem to be too good to be true, or too fantastic to be literally so or impossible to live in this life. You may want to test them. I'm talking about such teachings as the Golden Rule and the teachings in what has been called "The Sermon on the Mount." Go ahead; check them out; put them into action; test them. It will be well worth your while.

Megachurches: Megacreepy

2010-08-16T15:44:00.000-05:00

I've been inside a megachurch for a wedding. It was impressive in size and the seats were velvet and plush. The screen was huge, sound system top of the line and they spared no expense when it came to vast floor to ceiling drapery and plants. It was a ginormous auditorium and had a connecting grade AND high school attached. There was even a coffee shop in the lobby.

I was terrified as hell and could not wait to get out of there.

It was a theater...a circus...a stage. It had no humble scrappings of a poverty-rich Jesus. It was a tanning booth and chunky gold jewelry. It felt very charlatan. Very door-to-door salesman. It felt like the kind of sales seminars people suffer through to get the free vacation. I wonder if the free vacation they are peddling is heaven. I could not recognize God in that place even when the pastor was speaking. The modern art type of cross near the mic felt cheapened in the shadow of a widescreen sales pitch. What I heard and seen was not about humility and meekness. It was about putting on a show. Keep them entertained (it doesn't matter what you say, but HOW you say it) and they will keep coming back. The coins will fall into the slots if you keep them entertained.

In the original bible, church was defined as a gathering of people - often small. I can see where one would get more out of a smaller group. Like teacher to student ratios for classrooms. This place felt like an assembly line factory. The opiate of the great big mass who knew they were having a good time.

The decadence of the Catholic Church was on par with the excess of this megachurch business.

As a follow up, I think there are some good comments regarding the meshing of evangelicals and money in the United States from a 2005 Bloomberg article called "Of Megachurches and Megabucks".

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bloomberg Businessweek: The Popularity Issue
August 16, 2010

Church: Lakewood, Houston

Over the past two decades, megachurches in the U.S. have expanded their flocks from 200,000 to more than 8 million souls, according to the 2008 American Religious Identification Survey by Trinity College in Hartford. The biggest by far is Lakewood Church in Houston, a non-denominational Christian congregation. The church seats 16,000 and boasts a weekly attendance of 43,500, according to evangelical magazine Outreach's annual list of the "100 Largest and Fastest-Growing Churches." Lakewood's kinetic pastor, Joel Osteen, reaches 7 million U.S. TV viewers each week. His gospel of prosperity—"Don't simply settle for what your parents had"—is broadcast in 100 countries.

Although their most explosive growth may be behind them, megachurches are still attracting congregants. Outreach says America's 100 fastest-growing megachurches added 97,879 members last year. LifeChurch.tv grew fastest, adding more than 5,000. —Caroline Winter

Gradual Revelations

2010-08-09T12:26:00.000-05:00

Amazing. Another article favoring rationale within faith, recognizing that fundamentalism is isolating and dangerous. In the original post, the comments following the article were vast in their criticisms.

One comment insinuated that one could not believe in science and have faith. Rubbish. Science is part of God. How do you separate out those items that are suppose to debunk God when He is their creator?

Anyway, I find articles like this encouraging. All I can say is that having been on my own journey of enlightenment, it does take years and it is a gradual revelation.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The evolution of a Christian creationist

Source: Washington Post, August 9, 2010

Good News! Young evangelicals are shifting their allegiance.

Much has been said about the mass exodus of young adults from church, with some studies suggesting that seventy percent of Protestants age 18-30 drop out before they turn 23.

While the factors behind the trend are complex, I'm not surprised that young evangelicals like me are feeling less comfortable in the pews these days. Our pastors might not like it, but the world is changing, and we are changing with it. Unless the evangelical church in America can adapt and evolve, it might not survive in a postmodern world.

I know because I almost abandoned it myself.

A child of the culture wars, I knew what abortion was before I knew where babies came from. I grew up scribbling words like "debatable" and "unlikely" in the margins of biology textbooks, fearlessly defending a 6,000-year-old-earth against atheists I only knew in my imagination. When I was in middle school, my family moved to the buckle of the Bible Belt and became residents of Dayton, Tennessee, home of the famous Scopes Monkey Trial of 1925. There I attended a Christian college, listened to Christian music, and voted my Christian values. People called me "Bible girl."

This faith of mine didn't fall apart all at once, but instead eroded gradually, as I began studying science, interacting with people of other faiths, and experiencing a touch of "voter's remorse" when my pro-life president championed two wars overseas. My questions turned into skepticism, my skepticism into doubt, and I stopped going to church for a while.

My return to faith is something of a survival story that I chronicle in my memoir, "Evolving in Monkey Town" (Zondervan, 2010). The phone calls and emails I've received since its publication confirm what I've suspected all along: I'm not alone. Young evangelicals across the country are experiencing a collective crisis of faith.

Unfortunately, many leave Christianity altogether. But others, like me, simply undergo a change.

At the heart of this change is a shift in allegiance. For so long, evangelical Christianity demanded our allegiance to range of causes--from young earth creationism, to religious nationalism, to Republican politics. Somehow the radical teachings of a first century rabbi got all tangled up with modern political platforms and theological positions that were never essential to Christianity to begin with.

Young evangelicals are in the process of picking apart and deconstructing this tangled mess of ideas in order to get back to the most basic teachings of Jesus. So you shouldn't be surprised to bump into more and more and more oddities like me--a young evangelical Christian who votes for Democrats, has gay friends, and believes in evolution.

But don't be fooled into thinking this shift in allegiance means we're simply jumping from one political platform to another. At its best this change signals an allegiance first and foremost to the Kingdom of God, which knows no political party or geographic boundary, but instead grows outside of these confines through acts of love, humility, and peace. Instead of protesting outside abortion clinics, for example, we're championing adoption and supporting single moms. Instead of reducing our Christian service to a duty at the ballot box, we're looking for practical ways to address hunger, human trafficking, and homelessness.

The bad news for the Religious Right is that young evangelicals are tired of the culture wars. The good news for everyone else is that we're ready to make peace.

Rachel Held Evans is the author of "Evolving in Monkey Town: How a Girl Who Knew All the Answers Learned to Ask the Questions." She blogs at http://rachelheldevans.com.

By Rachel Held Evans

Another Author Who "Gets It"

2010-08-02T11:13:00.000-05:00

Amazing. the second article in a row that is positive! I'm so glad to be able to post something like this.

Sci-fi author Ray Bradbury is another artist who understands "flow" in the sense that I do. That, when looking back on the creations one makes, it can be declared: "It was not I who did that - I didn't do that." It is a gift attached to the Creator's hand more than an artist's own.

I love that he focuses on LOVE in knowing God.

--------------------------------------------

Sci-fi legend Ray Bradbury on God, 'monsters and angels'

By John Blake, CNN - August 2, 2010

(CNN) -- Ray Bradbury lives in a rambling Los Angeles home full of stuffed dinosaurs, a tin robot pushing an ice cream cart, and a life-sized Bullwinkle the Moose doll lounging in a cushioned chair. The 89-year-old science fiction author watches Fox News Channel by day, Turner Classic Movies by night. He spends the rest of his time summoning "the monsters and angels" of his imagination for his enchanting tales. Bradbury's imagination has yielded classic books such as "Fahrenheit 451," "The Martian Chronicles" and 600 short stories that predicted everything from the emergence of ATMs to live broadcasts of fugitive car chases. Bradbury, who turns 90 this month, says he will sometimes open one of his books late at night and cry out thanks to God. "I sit there and cry because I haven't done any of this," he told Sam Weller, his biographer and friend. "It's a God-given thing, and I'm so grateful, so, so grateful. The best description of my career as a writer is, 'At play in the fields of the Lord.' " Bradbury's stories are filled with references to God and faith, but he's rarely talked at length about his religious beliefs, until now. 'Joy is the grace we say to God' He describes himself as a "delicatessen religionist." He's inspired by Eastern and Western religions. The center of his faith, though, is love. Everything -- the reason he decided to write his first short story at 12; his 56-year marriage to his muse and late wife, Maggie; his friendships with everyone from Walt Disney to Alfred Hitchcock -- is based on love. Bradbury is in love with love. Once, when he saw Walt Disney, architect of the Magic Kingdom, Christmas shopping in Los Angeles, Bradbury approached him and said: "Mr. Disney, my name is Ray Bradbury and I love you." Bradbury's favorite book in the Bible is the Gospel of John, which is filled with references to love. "At the center of religion is love," Bradbury says from his home, which is painted dandelion yellow in honor of his favorite book, "Dandelion Wine." "I love you and I forgive you. I am like you and you are like me. I love all people. I love the world. I love creating. ... Everything in our life should be based on love." Bradbury's voice booms with enthusiasm over the phone. He now uses a wheelchair. His hearing has deteriorated. But he talks like an excitable kid with an old man's voice. (Each Christmas, Bradbury asked his wife to give him toys in place of any other gifts.) Weller, author of "Listen to The Echoes: The Ray Bradbury Interviews," says Bradbury ends many conversations with "God bless." Weller's book devotes an entire chapter to Bradbury's faith. "I once asked him if he prayed, and he said, 'Joy is the grace we say to God,' '' Weller says. Bradbury was raised as a Baptist in Waukegan, Illinois, by his father, a utility lineman, and his mother, a housewife. Both were infrequent churchgoers. His family moved to Los Angeles during the Great Depression to look for work. When he turned 14, Bradbury began visiting Catholic churches, synagogues and charismatic churches on his own to figure out his faith. Bradbury has been called a Unitarian, but he rejects that term. He dislikes labels of any kind. "I'm a Zen Buddhist if I would describe myself," he says. "I don't think about what I do. I do it. That's Buddhism. I jump off the cliff and build my wings on the way down." Bradbury started writing for pulp magazines like "Weird Tales" and "Thrilling Wonder Stories" at the beginning of his career. But even then, faith was an important theme. In his 1949 story "The Man," Bradbury tells the story of a rocket crew landing on Mars, only to see their thunder taken by a Christ-like figure who had arrived only hours earlier. In subsequent stories such as "Bless Me, Father, For I Have Sinned," priests and other ordinary people search and find redemption. Allusions to Christianity are common in his stories, but Bradbury doesn't define himself as a Christian. He considers Jesus a wise prophet, like Buddha and Confucius. "Jesus is a remarkable person," Bradbury says. "He was on his way to becoming Christ, and he made it." Weller, also author of "The Bradbury Chronicles: The Life of Ray Bradbury," says Bradbury's religious antenna is most attuned to Christianity. "The guy keeps writing about Jesus, but he doesn't consider himself a Christian," Weller says. "He says faith is necessary but that we should accept the fact that when it comes to God, none of us know anything." The Rev. Calvin Miller, author of the New Testament novels "The Singer Trilogy," sees an optimism in Bradbury's stories that's reflected in the Judeo-Christian belief that there will be a "new heaven and a new Earth" one day. Miller once wrote an essay about Bradbury's "Christian positivism," titled "Hope in a Doubtful Age," that was published in "Christianity Today," an evangelical magazine. After the essay appeared, Miller says, he was sorting through mail at home when he noticed two thank-you letters from Bradbury -- one written when the author was headed to Paris for vacation and another when he arrived. The following Christmas, Miller says, he received something else from Bradbury. "Every Christmas afterward, he sent me a card," Miller says. "I guess the religious implications of the article meant a lot to him." Will space travel destroy our belief in God? The religious implications of space travel also mean much to Bradbury. Bradbury has been a relentless supporter of space exploration. Ascending to the heavens won't destroy God; it'll reinforce belief, he says. "We're moving more toward God," he says. "We're moving toward more proofs of his creation in other worlds he's created in other parts of the universe. Space travel will increase our belief in God. As he approaches the end of his journey, Bradbury is still conjuring his monsters and angels. His next book, "Summer Morning, Summer Night," was just released last month. Many of his best friends, though, are not around to read him anymore. "My personal telephone book is a book of the dead now," Bradbury told Weller in his book of interviews. "I'm so old. Almost all of my friends have died, and I don't have the guts to take their names out of the book." Bradbury is also concerned about something beyond his own mortality: humanity's survival. Space travel and religion seek the same goal -- immortality, Bradbury says. If humanity remains on Earth, it is doomed because someday the sun will either explode or flame out. Everyone -- not just the characters in his story -- must eventually explore the stars, he says. "We must move into the universe. Mankind must save itself. We must escape the danger of war and politics. We must become astronauts and go out into the universe and discover the God in ourselves."

Anne Rice Sees the Light

2010-07-30T11:20:00.000-05:00

Well said, Anne, well said.

From her last quote (which I totally agree with), it sounds like she's not technically *quitting* the realm of belief in Christ. I 100% understand why she has made this decision and give her kudos for being vocal about it.

------------------------------------------

Legendary author Anne Rice has announced that she’s quitting Christianity.
Source: Marquee Blog - July 30, 2010

The “Interview with a Vampire” author, who wrote a book about her spirituality titled "Called Out of Darkness: A Spiritual Confession" in 2008, said Wednesday that she refuses to be “anti-gay,” “anti-feminist," “anti-science” and “anti-Democrat.”

Rice wrote, “For those who care, and I understand if you don't: Today I quit being a Christian ... It's simply impossible for me to ‘belong’ to this quarrelsome, hostile, disputatious, and deservedly infamous group. For ten years, I've tried. I've failed. I'm an outsider. My conscience will allow nothing else.”

Rice then added another post explaining her decision on Thursday:

“My faith in Christ is central to my life. My conversion from a pessimistic atheist lost in a world I didn't understand, to an optimistic believer in a universe created and sustained by a loving God is crucial to me," Rice wrote. "But following Christ does not mean following His followers. Christ is infinitely more important than Christianity and always will be, no matter what Christianity is, has been or might become.”

Grave Errors

2010-07-15T15:43:00.000-05:00

The raping of children by pedophile priests is not on par WHATSOEVER with the ordination of women and should not be subject to the same scrutiny. It is illogical and a fundamentally immoral view.

No Christian bible says the absence of a penis negates the ability to inspire the grace of God. Jesus was a man. It is not indicated anywhere in scripture -meaning THE BIBLE - not Vatican law - that all Catholic priests should be men, nor is there any citation of the issuing of penalties should a woman be ordained. Someone point this out to me. Point it out so I can deconstruct it.

No Vatican boys club has a right to invoke the name of God in a sick declaration that lumps the ordination of women into the same bucket of criminality or "grave"ness as child rape.

Excerpt from article:

"One new element included lists the attempted ordination of women as a "grave crime" subject to the same set of procedures and punishments meted out for sex abuse. That drew immediate criticism from women's ordination groups, who said making a moral equivalent between women priests and child rapists was offensive."

I'm not the submissive, non-questioning type so I don't see or understand how Catholic women (in 2010) can honestly reconcile this statement between their spirituality with God and Vatican doctrine. That chasm between universal truth and institutional policy appears to be widening at an alarming rate.

My blood boils. I thank Christ every day that I was able to see clearly and leave this female-subjugating institution.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Vatican: Ordination Of Women A 'Grave Crime'

NICOLE WINFIELD -07/15/10 11:05 AM

Source - http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/07/15/vatican-ordination-of-wom_n_647296.html

VATICAN CITY — The Vatican issued a revised set of in-house rules Thursday to respond to clerical sex abuse, targeting priests who molest the mentally disabled as well as children and priests who use child pornography, but making few substantive changes to existing practice. The new rules make no mention of the need for bishops to report clerical sex abuse to police, provide no canonical sanctions for bishops who cover up for abusers and do not include any "one-strike and you're out" policy for pedophile priests as demanded by some victims. As a result, they failed to satisfy victims' advocates, who said the revised rules amounted to little more than "administrative housekeeping" of existing practice when what was needed were bold new rules threatening bishops who fail to report molester priests. The rules cover the canonical penalties and procedures used for the most grave crimes in the church, both sacramental and moral, and double the statute of limitations applied to them. One new element included lists the attempted ordination of women as a "grave crime" subject to the same set of procedures and punishments meted out for sex abuse. That drew immediate criticism from women's ordination groups, who said making a moral equivalent between women priests and child rapists was offensive. The Vatican's sex crimes prosecutor acknowledged it was "only a document," and didn't solve the problem of clerical abuse. He defended the lack of any mention of the need to report abuse to police, saying all Christians were required to obey civil laws that would already demand sex crimes be reported. "If civil law requires you report, you must obey civil law," Monsignor Charles Scicluna told reporters. But "it's not for canonical legislation to get itself involved with civil law." Victims' groups have accused the church's internal justice system of failing to deal with abuse allegations and allowing bishops to ignore complaints in order to protect the church. "The first thing the church should be doing is reporting crimes to civil authorities," said Andrew Madden, a former Dublin altar boy who took the first public lawsuit against the church in Ireland in 1995.

BACKFIRE!!

2010-05-25T15:36:00.002-05:00

Wow. I mean... wow.

I've been crazy with grad school so I have not had the time to post, but I had to take a few minutes to comment on the following article.

Those in the Catholic church who are trying to vie and argue against abortions are oblivious to the fact that their twisted logic is turning against them. Observe the following graphic that metaphors perfectly with this situation:

Talk about a backfiring statement.

Focusing on the verbal diarrhea by John Ehrich (I refuse to include "Reverend" as his title), I must say it is a sorry state in 2010 that the woman, the human carrier of said human fetus, is forgotten; relegated as a mere function without feeling, without history, without an opinion or reason, even in the case of life threatening instances or sexual victimization. The misogyny of the Catholic church continues in obvious frustrated desperation to form that "sputtling", "befrazzled" sentence in red-faced attempts to vilify the woman in an abortion situation. However, the only thing that yapping lapdogs of the Church like this manage to do is embody the mind-fogged incoherent logic of a drunk-uncouth-fool-stumbling-and-falling-into-a-plate-glass-window-hitting-rock-bottom-with-bottle-still-in-hand, yelling "Oh, and other thing...!!"

(Sigh) And I keep saying it: the church places the living 2nd to the unborn. The Vatican Boys' Club in the U.S. certainly does not scream this loud or passionately when babies are blown up in the theater of unjust wars.

The compassion of Christ has gotten trampled underfoot in the aisles of the Church. The understanding of Jesus was drowned in the Baptismal font. The love of God has been burned and disintegrated in the ashes of ritual. Spirituality has become taboo as these men put on the stoles of a guilt-centered religion, which fits neatly in the coffers. The agape of the Holy Spirit has been replaced with the Catholic Church 2.0., an institution which is growing ever more unrecognizable as being "Christ-centered".

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Catholic Leader Says Woman Should Die With Her Fetus -- When Did Woman-Hating Go Mainstream?

By Carole Joffe, RH Reality Check - Posted on May 24, 2010, Printed on May 25, 2010
http://www.alternet.org/story/146991/

"She consented in the murder of an unborn child. There are some situations where the mother may in fact die along with her child."

With this brief quote, the speaker, the Rev. John Ehrich, medical ethics director for the Diocese of Phoenix, deserves credit for achieving a twofer in a recently revived (if not formally declared) misogyny competition that is now sweeping the anti-choice world. He is not only stating that a gravely ill woman (the mother of four children) should have been left to die, rather than being permitted an abortion; he is also explaining why Sister Mary Margaret McBride, the nun-administrator of a Catholic hospital who authorized the abortion (thereby saving the woman’s life) deserves to be excommunicated.

This case, which has received wide coverage in RH Reality Check and other media, has predictably stunned many people, across the abortion divide. Some have pointed out that the Phoenix diocese misinterpreted Catholic health care directives, and that abortion is permissible under these rules when a woman’s life is at stake. Others have made the common sense observation that if the woman had died, not only would her four children remain motherless, but the 11-week old fetus would not have survived either. Inevitably, some commented on the disparity between the nun’s swift excommunication and the fact that none of the identified pedophile priests have received such punishment.

But while the Phoenix case may cause the most jaw-dropping, with its undisguised preference for a woman’s death over an abortion, there are other recent instances that similarly suggest an upsurge of blatant woman-hating in the antiabortion world. Take the notorious Utah law passed earlier this year in response to the deeply sad case of a pregnant teenager who paid a stranger to beat her in the hope of inducing a miscarriage. (In spite of the severe beating that occurred, the pregnancy resulted in a live birth). Outraged that the male in question received a jail sentence but that there was no legal mechanism with which to charge the teen, a Utah legislator pushed through legislation that criminalizes the seeking of an illegal abortion, and which many observers believe has the practical effect of making all miscarriages in the state theoretically suspect. Had this law been in effect at the time of the incident described above, and had the fetus not survived, the desperate young woman could have received fifteen years to life. As the untroubled sponsor of the bill told a reporter, the young woman “has to face the consequences of her barbaric actions.” No one stopped to ask under what conditions she had gotten pregnant nor why she took such drastic measures.

Then there are the mandatory ultrasound laws. These are occurring in a number of state legislatures, but nowhere to date with such viciousness as the one recently passed in Oklahoma. There the new law stipulates that one hour before her abortion, the patient must receive an ultrasound, with the monitor positioned so that she can see it, and the doctor must point to and describe the heart, limbs and organs of the fetus. There are no exceptions for victims of rape or incest.

The current Supreme Court has also shown an unprecedented and disturbing hostility to women with respect to abortion. In its most recent decision on the subject, the 2007 Gonzales v Carhart case which upheld a ban on a certain abortion technique (intact dilation and extraction, or so-called “partial birth abortion”), the Court, shockingly, for the first time upheld an abortion restriction which did not allow any exception for a woman’s health.

Do these examples of misogyny represent anything new? To be sure, in some extremist anti-choice circles, full throated woman-hating never went away. (See, for example, this video from several years ago of Flip Benham screeching at women entering a N. Carolina clinic that “Satan will drink the blood of your child!”) But in other, more mainstream quarters of the movement, the heated, and hateful rhetoric of the period immediately after Roe—where women seeking abortion were routinely called “sluts” and “baby killers” —gradually became replaced by a new frame: abortion hurts women. Given that by the early 1980s, about 40 percent of American women were estimated to have an abortion during their reproductive years (the number now is about 33 percent), arguably such hate speech was counterproductive for the opponents of abortion: too many Americans either themselves had had an abortion or knew someone who did. Thus, antiabortion rhetoric shifted to professed sympathy for women, and abortion providers—those doing the hurting—became the main objects of demonization.

The nature of laws restricting abortions has also undergone changes in the recent past, reflecting a heightened mean-spiritedness. While all such laws have as their goal the objective of making the procedure more difficult to obtain, earlier laws—for example, the waiting periods, or the TRAP laws governing minute, arguably irrelevant physical features of freestanding clinics-- these measures did not have quite the same blatant cruelty as current measures do, given the mandates to force a woman to hear a description of her ultrasound or to be told terrifying lies about supposed links between abortion and breast cancer, suicide and infertility, as is required in a number of states.

Why has this increase in undisguised misogyny occurred? Certainly part of the answer is the election of Barack Obama. Like other sectors of the rightwing, the antichoice movement has been both enraged and energized by the Obama presidency. There not only has been a change in rhetoric and in the quantity and quality of abortion legislation since the 2008 election, but also an upsurge in aggression and violence at the site of clinics themselves (though most of this violence to date has been directed at providers, rather than patients, as we saw with the tragic murder of Dr. Tiller one year ago).

Another explanation lies in the considerable success the antichoice movement has had in stigmatizing abortion, and therefore those who both receive abortions and provide them. As the overall number of abortion patients drop, and as poor women of color disproportionately comprise the population of abortion patients, it has become far easier for mainstream actors in the antichoice movement to see a split world, in which good women do the “right thing” when faced with an unwanted pregnancy and bad women don’t. This deeply stigmatized view of abortion recipients enables the “respectable” opponents of abortion—the legislators, the Church officials and so on—to go a rhetorical place where their extremist colleagues have always been.

Let's Talk Heaven

2010-03-30T13:47:00.010-05:00

Happy (upcoming) Easter! I came across this article below that brings up some interesting questions with regards to how people think "Heaven" will be. Or if it will be at all. Or if it is simply metaphorical.

I would like to address a couple of points that this author touches upon:

1) "Cremation, once viewed as the ultimate desecration of the human body, an insult to God who makes the resurrection happen, will soon surpass burial as Americans' preferred way to dispose of a corpse."

I think that it is enivronmentally responsible of a believer to choose the cremation route. If one believes God will resurrect the body, then God (who is all powerful) can construct your body back into its original state from a scattered pile of ashes in the blink of an eye. To think that one's body needs to be preserved for it to be resurrected in "original form" needs to rethink their view of God's power.

2) They quote that great theological cop-out: "We cannot know what God has in store for us."

To admit we don't know sh*t about sh*t is not a cop-out. It is being honest. It is assuming humility as a human of limited intelligence. Who can know God's mind for sure? Find me someone who has 100% of all the theological answers. I would more readily accept this "cop-out" than an absolutist idea.

Aside from being concerned with finding the answers about Heaven, I really like the questions that it brings up and I have a great book I would like to tout that deals with this precise question.

In C.S. Lewis' wonderful book The Great Divorce, a man gets to heaven to find that he can essentially no longer do what he loved to do on earth - research and writing - because all of the answers, an angel tells the man, "are all laid out before you. You need to search no more." This perplexes the man who found the pursuit of truth to be his passion and love. Upset that he no longer can write and research for answers in Heaven, he goes down to check out Hell.

I am also reminded that being good for the reward of Heaven alone is not...all good. Being good for goodness' sake is better. It is truer. Love motivating love is pure. I think of this parable:

Saint Teresa of Avila, the 16th century Spanish mystic, saw an angel rushing towards her, carrying a torch and a bucket of water. “Where are you going with that torch and bucket?” she asked. "What will you do with them?" “With the water,” the angel answered, “I will put out the fires of hell, and with the fire I will burn down the mansions of heaven; then we will see who really loves God.”

Many philosophers have debated the intent of being good. If there is no reward, will one still be inclined to be good?

Even Aristotle had a matrix of intent in Nichomachean Ethics:

Virtuous - those that truly enjoy doing what is right and do so without moral dilemma
Continent - does the virtuous thing most of the time, but must overcome conflict
Incontinent - faces the same moral conflict, but usually chooses the vicious ("full of vice") thing
Vicious - sees little value in virtue and doesn't attempt it

Highest Good is...

desirable for its own sake
not desirable for the sake of some other good
all other ‘goods’ desirable for its sake

This is very similar to the oft-used saying from 1 Corinthians 13:4-7

"Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. It is not rude, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always preserves."

While I would love to be able to draw and strive to better myself in the afterlife like the man in The Great Divorce, I think in the end what matters is not the reward we get in the form of Heaven, but how many lives we have touched in betterment and in Love in our time on this earth. I think that while each person will be judged on their individual actions and character, so perhaps is Heaven customized to our individual dreams of it.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Far From Heaven

By Lisa Miller - NEWSWEEK - Published Mar 25, 2010 - From the magazine issue dated Apr 5, 2010

Find this article at http://www.newsweek.com/id/235418

It's Easter—that most pleasant of springtime holidays—when children stuff themselves with marshmallows and stain their fingers with pastel dyes. In reality, of course, Easter is about something darker and more fantastic. It's a celebration of the final act of the Passion, in which Jesus rose from his tomb in his body three days after his execution, to reside in heaven with God. The Gospels insist on the veracity of this supernatural event. The risen Lord "ate barbecued fish [Luke] and walked through doors [John]," is how a friend of mine, an Episcopalian priest, puts it. This rising—the Resurrection—remains at the center of the Christian faith, the narrative climax of every creed. Jesus died and rose again so that all his followers could, eventually, do the same. This story has strained the credulity of even the most devoted believer. For, truly, it's unbelievable.

Resurrection—the physical reality, not the metaphorical interpretation—puts everything we imagine about heaven to the test. My new book, Heaven: Our Enduring Fascination With the Afterlife, argues that while 80 percent of Americans say they believe in heaven, few of us have the slightest clue about what we mean. Heaven, everyone agrees, is the good place you go after death, a reward for struggle and faithfulness on earth. In most of our popular conceptions, we have bodies in heaven: selves, consciousness, identity. We do things. People yearn for reunions in heaven with friends and relatives—and even with their pets. "I want to lay my head on Grandma Lucy's lap," the Christian memoirist Barbara Brown Taylor wrote in an essay. "I want to shell field peas with Fannie Belle and listen to Schubert with Earl." Some people imagine heaven as the place where their most material yearnings are fulfilled. The evangelist Billy Graham once spoke of driving a yellow Cadillac in heaven; the heroine of Alice Sebold's novel The Lovely Bones eats peppermint ice cream; suicide bombers in the Middle East fantasize about the sexual ministrations of 72 dark-eyed virgins. In all these visions, embodiment is the crux of the matter. If you don't have a body in heaven, then what kind of heaven are you hoping for?

Despite the insistence of the most conservative branches of all three Western religions on resurrection as an incontrovertible fact, most of us are circumspect. The number of Americans who say they believe in the resurrection of Jesus Christ has dropped 10 points since 2003 to 70 percent, according to the most recent Harris poll; only 26 percent of Americans think that they'll have bodies in heaven, according to a 1997 Time/CNN poll. Thanks to the growth here of Eastern religions, reincarnation—the belief that after death a soul returns to earth in another body—is gaining adherents. Nearly 30 percent of 2003 Harris poll respondents said they believed in reincarnation; of self-professed Christians, that number was 21 percent. Reincarnation and resurrection have, traditionally, been mutually exclusive. Among Christian conservatives, a private hope of reincarnation would be seen as not just illogical but heretical.

Cremation, once viewed as the ultimate desecration of the human body, an insult to God who makes the resurrection happen, will soon surpass burial as Americans' preferred way to dispose of a corpse. Already, a third of Americans are cremated, not buried, and that trend line is headed straight up. Stephen Prothero, religion professor at Boston University and author of the forthcoming God Is Not One, believes that the rise in cremation is linked to a growing disregard for the doctrine of resurrection. "It seems fantastic and irrational that we're going to have a body in heaven," he says. Even the Roman Catholic Church has softened its stance on cremation: bodies are better, it said in 1997, but ashes will do in a pinch.

Resurrection presented credibility problems from the outset. Who, the Sadducees taunted Jesus, does the man who married seven wives in succession reside with in heaven? The subtext of their teasing is obvious: if the resurrection is true, as Jesus promised, then in heaven you must have your wife, and all the things that go along with wives: sex, arguments, dinner. Jesus responds in a typically cranky way: "You just don't get it," he says (my paraphrase). "You are wrong," he said in Matthew's Gospel, "because you know neither the Scriptures nor the power of God."

Even in biblical times, resurrection deniers who hoped for an afterlife took an alternative route. This is what scholars call "the immortality of the soul." Embraced by Plato and popular today especially among progressive believers (Reform Jews and liberal Protestants, for example) and people who call themselves "spiritual but not religious," the immortality of the soul is easier to swallow than resurrection. After death, the soul—unique and indestructible—ascends to heaven to be with God while the corpse, the locus of our senses and all our low human desires, stays behind to rot. This more reasonable view, perhaps, has a serious defect: a disembodied soul attaching itself to God in heaven offers no more comfort or inspiration than an escaped balloon. Consolation was not the goal of Plato's afterlife. Without sight or hearing, taste or touch, a soul in heaven can no more enjoy the "green, green pastures" of the Muslim paradise, or the God light of Dante's cantos, than it can play a Bach cello suite or hit a home run. Rationalistic visions of heaven fail to satisfy.

Another popular way out of the Easter conundrum—"I want to believe in heaven but can't get my head around the revivification of human flesh"—is to imagine "resurrection" as a metaphor for something else: an inexplicable event, a new kind of life, the birth of the Christian community on earth, the renewal of a people, an individual's spiritual rebirth, a bodiless ascension to God. Progressives frequently fall back on resurrection-as-metaphor, for it allows them to celebrate Easter while also expressing a reasonable agnosticism. They quote that great theological cop-out: "We cannot know what God has in store for us.

The intellectual flabbiness of this approach causes agonies for such orthodox Christians as N. T. Wright, the Anglican bishop of Durham, England. "People have been told so often that resurrection is just a metaphor," he once told my editor Jon Meacham and me in an interview for this magazine. "In other words, [Jesus] went to heaven, whatever that means. And they've never realized that the word 'resurrection' simply didn't mean that. If people [in the first century] had wanted to say that he died and went to heaven, they had perfectly good ways of saying that." The whole point of the Christian story is that the Resurrection really happened, Wright insists. The disciples rolled back the rock on the third day, and Jesus' body was gone. This insistence on the veracity of resurrection is no less sure in Judaism, where the Orthodox pray thrice a day to a God "who causes the dead to come to life," or in Islam. "I swear by the day of resurrection!" proclaims the Quran. "Yes, Indeed!

And so, the paradox. Resurrection may be unbelievable, but belief in a traditional heaven requires it. I think often of Jon D. Levenson, a Jewish scholar at Harvard Divinity School who hopes to bring the idea of resurrection back to mainstream Judaism, where it has been lost in practice for generations. I visited him one cold November afternoon because, as a literal-minded skeptic, I wanted him to explain to me how it works. How does God put bodies—burned in fire or pulverized in war—back together again? Levenson looked at me, eyes twinkling, and said, "It's no use to ask, 'If I had a lab at MIT, how would I try to resurrect a body?' The belief in resurrection is more radical. It's a supernatural event. It's a special act of grace or of kindness on God's part." For my part, I don't buy it. I do, however, leave the door open a crack for radical acts of grace and kindness—and for humbling ourselves before all that we don't understand.

Double Wham-tastic!

2010-03-18T13:21:00.007-05:00

I'm writing about the following articles a little late to their actually being "breaking news" but better late than never.

First up is Glenn Beck. One of my least favorite people who I lump into the same group with such hatemongers as Ann Coulter and Rush Limbaugh. Beck urges people to leave churches that preach social justice. Now, when this news was technically "new" I posted it on Facebook and it accrued nearly 20 comments in 2 days, 2 of which were in favor and could not argue with any sense of aptitude, clarity or depth the reasons why they agreed with Beck on this other than something about separating politics from the church teachings. Sorry, anything that has to do with social justice and economic justice is going to be mentioned in the basic New Testament scripts. Because Jesus did not practice his love in a vaccuum to everyone on the same social or economic spectrum.

Now, I fancy myself pretty familiar with the Bible and while the actual modern terms of 'social justice' or 'economic justice' may not have been included verbatim in the Biblical texts of olde, the example and actions that Jesus portrayed scream it from the mountaintops. Jesus instructed people to care for the poor, give to the needy, clothe those who have none, feed those who are hungry, visit those in prison...and if you are asked for your shoes, take off your cloak and give it as well, expecting nothing in return (to summarize). That, Mr. Beck, is social justice. By giving to those who are in dire need, that is the fulfillment of economic justice on the most fundamental level. The ill-formed logic of this nutter is that Communism / Socialism will break out if enough people are cared for and given enough, apparently. The Bible and the Constitution can be misconstrued to fulfill your foaming-mouth hatemongering agenda, Mr. Beck. And God watches.

And in the article below, Beck channels the lingo of typical conspiracy quacks: _____ is really code for _____. It smacks of backward extremism to look into an ancient text so full of love and the basic tenets of "Love thy neighbor" that you can pull something out like that, twist it up and present it in the interest of his own f***ed up divisive agenda. And while I personally am not a member of an institutional religion, I think the (lack of) reason he presents to people to actually leave their churches, of which I imagine are a rock for many of them, is utterly errorsome and I loathe to think that any of his blind sheep would heed that misleading and harmfully polarizing blight. Shame on him for spreading the disease of lies - around the Bible, no less.

This Christian Universalist will now quote a brilliant atheist, Voltaire: "Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities."

The second part of this post focuses on the Gay Sex Scandal of the Catholic Church, which can be seen in the article below the Glenn Beck BS.

I'm only going to say this: Anything done in the dark will eventually come to light. That is all.

----------------------------------------------------------

Glenn Beck Urges Listeners to Leave Churches That Preach Social Justice

PoliticsDaily.com - 3-8-10

On his daily radio and television shows last week, Fox News personality Glenn Beck set out to convince his audience that "social justice," the term many Christian churches use to describe their efforts to address poverty and human rights, is a "code word" for communism and Nazism. Beck urged Christians to discuss the term with their priests and to leave their churches if leaders would not reconsider their emphasis on social justice.

"I'm begging you, your right to religion and freedom to exercise religion and read all of the passages of the Bible as you want to read them and as your church wants to preach them . . . are going to come under the ropes in the next year. If it lasts that long it will be the next year. I beg you, look for the words 'social justice' or 'economic justice' on your church Web site. If you find it, run as fast as you can. Social justice and economic justice, they are code words. Now, am I advising people to leave their church? Yes!"

Later, Beck held up cards, one with a hammer and sickle and other with a swastika. "Communists are on the left, and the Nazis are on the right. That's what people say. But they both subscribe to one philosophy, and they flew one banner. . . . But on each banner, read the words, here in America: 'social justice.' They talked about economic justice, rights of the workers, redistribution of wealth, and surprisingly, democracy."

AND

Vatican Hit By Gay Sex Scandal

Huffington Post - Adam Taylor First Posted: 03- 5-10 07:28 AM Updated: 03- 5-10 12:50 PM

The Vatican has been thrown into chaos by reports that one of the Pope's ceremonial ushers, as well as a member of the elite Vatican choir, were involved in a homosexual prostitution ring.

The allegations came to light after Italian newspapers published transcripts of phone calls recorded by police, who had been conducting an unrelated corruption investigation.

The tapes appear to record Angelo Balducci, a Gentleman of His Holiness, negotiating with Thomas Chinedu Ehiem, a 29-year-old Nigerian Vatican chorister, about men he wanted brought to him for sexual purposes. Balducci was allegedly paying 2,000 euros ($2,714) for each man he met, according to the Irish Times.

Balducci is recorded describing precise physical details of the men he wanted. The transcripts record that during five months in 2008, Ehiem procured for Balducci at least 10 contacts with, among others, "two black Cuban lads," a former male model from Naples, and a rugby player from Rome.

A report by the Italian Carabinieri on the case said: "In order to organize casual encounters of a sexual nature, he availed himself of the intercession of two individuals who, it is maintained, may form part of an organized network, especially active in [Rome], of exploiters or at least facilitators of male prostitution."

The police probe into corruption resulted in Balducci and 4 others being arrested. Allegations of prostitution were only revealed later, and have resulted in Ehiem's dismissal from the Vatican choir.

Balducci held a high position within the Vatican and carried the coffin of Pope John Paul at his 2005 funeral. He has now lost his position as a Gentleman of the Holiness. His trial for corruption is still pending.

The Catholic Church has weathered a storm of controversy in recent years over allegations of sexual abuse by its members. Whilst homosexuality is not outright condemned within the Church, it is taught that homosexual acts are "are intrinsically disordered."

And as a follow up to this article, this piece came out on Friday, March 19, 2010

The Bernie Madoffs of the Catholic Church

2010-02-18T12:49:00.001-06:00

As someone TRYING to be spiritually and mature and respectful to the Catholics during this their time of Lent, a time that reminds me of ridiculous Catholic church law not found in the Bible, I can't help but post the following article and document that reinforces the politics, criminality, secrecy, and violation of the law of God as well as human rights within the Catholic Church institution.

You may give up meat on Fridays, but you don't give up the truth? Unbelievable. Unbelievably hypocritical.

I have a hard time thinking these abusive priests actually believe in God and their own dogma at all. If they did, they would know that God knows all and you reap what you sow. Somehow they can still sleep at night and obviously think themselves righteous enough to hold the positions of power they do, performing their crimes in secrecy upon their prey -- the worst of all -- innocent children, for whom my heart weeps.

They are like the Bernie Madoffs of the Catholic Church (but worse).

-------------------------------------------------------

Vatican told bishops to cover up sex abuse
Expulsion threat in secret documents

Read the 1962 Vatican document (PDF file)

Antony Barnett, public affairs editor The Observer, Sunday 17 August 2003 01.27 BST Article historyThe Vatican instructed Catholic bishops around the world to cover up cases of sexual abuse or risk being thrown out of the Church.

The Observer has obtained a 40-year-old confidential document from the secret Vatican archive which lawyers are calling a 'blueprint for deception and concealment'. One British lawyer acting for Church child abuse victims has described it as 'explosive'.

The 69-page Latin document bearing the seal of Pope John XXIII was sent to every bishop in the world. The instructions outline a policy of 'strictest' secrecy in dealing with allegations of sexual abuse and threatens those who speak out with excommunication.

They also call for the victim to take an oath of secrecy at the time of making a complaint to Church officials. It states that the instructions are to 'be diligently stored in the secret archives of the Curia [Vatican] as strictly confidential. Nor is it to be published nor added to with any commentaries.'

The document, which has been confirmed as genuine by the Roman Catholic Church in England and Wales, is called 'Crimine solicitationies', which translates as 'instruction on proceeding in cases of solicitation'.

It focuses on sexual abuse initiated as part of the confessional relationship between a priest and a member of his congregation. But the instructions also cover what it calls the 'worst crime', described as an obscene act perpetrated by a cleric with 'youths of either sex or with brute animals (bestiality)'.

Bishops are instructed to pursue these cases 'in the most secretive way... restrained by a perpetual silence... and everyone... is to observe the strictest secret which is commonly regarded as a secret of the Holy Office... under the penalty of excommunication'.

Texan lawyer Daniel Shea uncovered the document as part of his work for victims of abuse from Catholic priests in the US. He has handed it over to US authorities, urging them to launch a federal investigation into the clergy's alleged cover-up of sexual abuse.

He said: 'These instructions went out to every bishop around the globe and would certainly have applied in Britain. It proves there was an international conspiracy by the Church to hush up sexual abuse issues. It is a devious attempt to conceal criminal conduct and is a blueprint for deception and concealment.'

British lawyer Richard Scorer, who acts for children abused by Catholic priests in the UK, echoes this view and has described the document as 'explosive'.

He said: 'We always suspected that the Catholic Church systematically covered up abuse and tried to silence victims. This document appears to prove it. Threatening excommunication to anybody who speaks out shows the lengths the most senior figures in the Vatican were prepared to go to prevent the information getting out to the public domain.'

Scorer pointed out that as the documents dates back to 1962 it rides roughshod over the Catholic Church's claim that the issue of sexual abuse was a modern phenomenon.

He claims the discovery of the document will raise fresh questions about the actions of Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O'Connor, the head of the Roman Catholic Church in England and Wales.

Murphy-O'Connor has been accused of covering up allegations of child abuse when he was Bishop of Arundel and Brighton. Instead of reporting to the police allegations of abuse against Michael Hill, a priest in his charge, he moved him to another position where he was later convicted for abusing nine children.

Although Murphy-O'Connor has apologised publicly for his mistake, Scorer claims the secret Vatican document raises the question about whether his failure to report Hill was due to him following this instruction from Rome.

Scorer, who acts for some of Hill's victims, said: 'I want to know whether Murphy-O'Connor knew of these Vatican instructions and, if so, did he apply it. If not, can he tell us why not?'

A spokesman for the Catholic Church denied that the secret Vatican orders were part of any organised cover-up and claims lawyers are taking the document 'out of context' and 'distorting it'.

He said: 'This document is about the Church's internal disciplinary procedures should a priest be accused of using confession to solicit sex. It does not forbid victims to report civil crimes. The confidentiality talked about is aimed to protect the accused as applies in court procedures today. It also takes into consideration the special nature of the secrecy involved in the act of confession.' He also said that in 1983 the Catholic Church in England and Wales introduced its own code dealing with sexual abuse, which would have superseded the 1962 instructions. Asked whether Murphy-O'Connor was aware of the Vatican edict, he replied: 'He's never mentioned it to me.'

Lawyers point to a letter the Vatican sent to bishops in May 2001 clearly stating the 1962 instruction was in force until then. The letter is signed by Cardinal Ratzinger, the most powerful man in Rome beside the Pope and who heads the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith - the office which ran the Inquisition in the Middle Ages.

Rev Thomas Doyle, a US Air Force chaplain in Germany and a specialist in Church law, has studied the document. He told The Observer: 'It is certainly an indication of the pathological obsession with secrecy in the Catholic Church, but in itself it is not a smoking gun.

'If, however, this document actually has been the foundation of a continuous policy to cover clergy crimes at all costs, then we have quite another issue. There are too many authenticated reports of victims having been seriously intimidated into silence by Church authorities to assert that such intimidation is the exception and not the norm.

'If this document has been used as a justification for this intimidation then we possibly have what some commentators have alleged, namely, a blueprint for a cover-up. This is obviously a big "if" which requires concrete proof.'

Additional research by Jason Rodrigues

Links to Spirituality Found in the Brain

2010-02-12T13:55:00.000-06:00

My friend Tom sent the following article to me. And I find it extremely interesting -- and even comforting -- to think that:

A) people are naturally neurologically equipped to feel self-transcendence and that this study allegedly was able to indicate this. This hard-wire programming tells me that

1) Evolution found this important enough to keep it through the ages.
2) Since I believe God is responsible for evolution, this is His way to keep us (or some of us, at least) more in tune (like reception bars on a phone) to the recognition of their placement in the whole of His universe.

B) As damage occurs to the brain this study's report that the feeling of self-transcendence increases is perhaps the body's way of readying itself to die, after all, the body doesn't know that surgery is for the benefit of its life, it views surgery as a red flag: "warning, warning, body being cut open, damage, prepare to exit!" Perhaps this can be likened to the shock that takes place when one gets a limb severed and is still conscious, yet cannot feel pain. A rather merciful event if you ask me. Combine the self-transcendence with shock and you have a very peaceful pre-exiting preparation.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Links to Spirituality Found in the Brain

LiveScience Staff
Source: Yahoo News - Original Post
Thu Feb 11, 10:10 pm ET

Scientists have identified areas of the brain that, when damaged, lead to greater spirituality. The findings hint at the roots of spiritual and religious attitudes, the researchers say.

The study, published in the Feb. 11 issue of the journal Neuron, involves a personality trait called self-transcendence, which is a somewhat vague measure of spiritual feeling, thinking, and behaviors. Self-transcendence "reflects a decreased sense of self and an ability to identify one's self as an integral part of the universe as a whole," the researchers explain.

Before and after surgery, the scientists surveyed patients who had brain tumors removed. The surveys generate self-transcendence scores.

Selective damage to the left and right posterior parietal regions of the brain induced a specific increase in self-transcendence, or ST, the surveys showed.

"Our symptom-lesion mapping study is the first demonstration of a causative link between brain functioning and ST," said Dr. Cosimo Urgesi from the University of Udine in Italy. "Damage to posterior parietal areas induced unusually fast changes of a stable personality dimension related to transcendental self-referential awareness. Thus, dysfunctional parietal neural activity may underpin altered spiritual and religious attitudes and behaviors."

Previous neuroimaging studies had linked activity within a large network in the brain that connects the frontal, parietal, and temporal cortexes with spiritual experiences, "but information on the causative link between such a network and spirituality is lacking," explains lead study author, Urgesi said.

One study, reported in 2008, suggested that the brain's right parietal lobe defines "Me," and people with less active Me-Definers are more likely to lead spiritual lives.

The finding could lead to new strategies for treating some forms of mental illness.

"If a stable personality trait like ST can undergo fast changes as a consequence of brain lesions, it would indicate that at least some personality dimensions may be modified by influencing neural activity in specific areas," said Dr. Salvatore M. Aglioti from Sapienza University of Rome. "Perhaps novel approaches aimed at modulating neural activity might ultimately pave the way to new treatments of personality disorders."

Commercial Religion

2010-01-26T11:52:00.003-06:00

The other day I was thinking that the Catholic church really parallels a publicly traded company (stock symbol: GLT?) with a board of (men only) directors (Vatican) and an executive CEO (Pope). And the shareholders are those congregants who have bought into the dogma, hoping for a stock split into an elitist idea of heaven.

If you've ever owned stock in a company or had an account with a broker, you've probably received in the mail privacy policies and forms to nominate new board members. Unfortunately, democracy does not exist in a papacy...but commercialism does, and the cost of the commercials are passed onto the shareholders despite what they think.

Recently TV commercials have been aired calling to the public as the church attempts to increase market share. The website of the "media firm" responsible for the marketing: CatholicsComeHome.org

I'm not entirely sure where God fits into this marketing. They seem to really focus on giving those who have left the church the thumbs up to "come back to the family". Ya know, the dysfunctional one that screwed them up in the first place.

I'm not sure how well this will work out for the church's business plan, but I'm sure their accountants are watching the books and their stock closely.

---

I'm not even going to mention the comments that Pat Robertson, a faux Christian, said about Haiti and their alleged "pact with Satan", resulting in the recent earthquake which he insinuates they deserved. He is a ridiculous antiChrist asshole.

---

The other item I wanted to mention today was in this article. Apparently, Pope John Paul II had been whipping himself (a la Opus Dei?) as well as sleeping on the floor and depriving himself of food to the extreme during Lent to try and attain "Christian perfection". Hmm. I am pretty sure NO ONE (meaning no human) can attain Christian perfection (or any perfection) unless Christ grants it. It is not something attained so much as it is something given as a gift, just as one does not have the ability to save their own soul through belief. Jesus did that for us by dying on the cross. If people are able to save themselves through belief, then God's only son, Jesus, dying on the cross was not 100% successful as it did not save *the world* from its sins as stated in the Bible. Also, you are supposed to love your neighbor as yourself. Was Pope John Paul II whipping his neighbors, too? Also, Lent is not in the Bible, Jesus and Lent are totally different. It was a man-made season the Church came up with to help spur the economy of yore. Look it up.

Also in this article it is stated:

"The Vatican must now confirm that a miracle attributed to John Paul's intercession occurred in order for him to be beatified - a step which many Vatican watchers have suggested may come as early as October."

Wait. So they can SCHEDULE "miracles" to occur in order to canonize someone? Am I reading this wrong? And how, exactly, do they define a miracle? The convenience that Pope Benedict is moving Pope John Paul up on the beatification ladder is a bold move for the head of the board of directors. Maybe Pope Benedict is bullish on the market; maybe the miracle will occur if their valuation soars from their marketing efforts and they see their stock rise.

Sigh. Where is God's place here? God's message to love one another is lost in 2 minute Catholic Churchianity TV ads. It is simply spreading the message of business. Cha-ching!

Too Judgey

2010-01-04T14:33:00.006-06:00

2010 is here and I'm grateful to see it. Happy New Year, everyone! And, we're off...

All I can do is shake my head at this pundit. Is someone this irrational honestly taken seriously? Really? How do they not get sacked by their network after making this type of statement? Oh, I forgot, it is on Fox News. They never fail to disappoint the rest of us. Tsk, tsk. And I'm in a graduate class right now that covers the very idea of media reporters NOT sticking to the news and issues, but rather continue to market their own station/show. STICK WITH THE NEWS.

Yes, Mr. Hume, show the world that you will use Tiger Woods' failing to make yourself appear so high and mighty...and "judgey". Sell your show. SELL IT! Just like you try to sell the Christian faith here. Because Christian husbands don't cheat on their wives...and if they do they are immediately or more easily forgiven than cheating Buddhist husbands. And because switching faiths is as easy as switching cable stations.

HUME-TO-TIGER ADVICE FAIL.

This video is from Fox's Fox News Sunday, broadcast Jan. 3, 2010.

Buddhism is inferior to Christianity when it comes to forgiveness of sins, according to Fox News pundit Brit Hume. Tiger Woods should turn his back on Buddhism and become a Christian to be forgiven for cheating on his wife, Hume told Fox News' Chris Wallace Sunday.

"The extent to which he can recover seems to me depends on his faith," said Hume. "He is said to be a Buddhist. I don't think that faith offers the kind of redemption and forgiveness offered by the Christian faith. My message to Tiger is, 'Tiger turn to the Christian faith and you can make a total recovery and be a great example to the world."

Woods is the most famous among several American celebrity Buddhists. Richard Gere, Herbie Hancock, Steven Seagal, Leonard Cohen, Tina Turner and Orlando Bloom were recently called the most famous Buddhists in the world. The list goes so far as to argue Tiger Woods is more famous than the Dalai Lama himself.

Hume's statements are particularly ironic given the recent sex scandals encountered by an assortment of Christian politicians.

Two noted journalists criticized Hume's remarks.

At his Daily Dish blog, The Atlantic's Andrew Sullivan wrote, "The pure sectarianism of this comment - its adoption of the once-secular stage of political journalism to insert a call for apostasy - is striking. It even seemed to catch Bill Kristol off-guard a little." MSNBC anchor David Shuster left a number of Tweets at his Twitter account.
Agreed... it was inappropriate
I respect everybody's faith, different from mine or not. But don't use a Sunday news show to preach your faith. Analyze the news.

In the interest of fairness, that sunday show should make time for a member of Bhuddism given Brit's criticism of that religion.

Think Progress also notes, "Hume’s colleagues on the Fox Business network decided to do a little digging into his claims. The Don Imus show crew reported that Hume doesn’t quite have his facts straight on Buddhism."

According to Imus, "Well, we checked this morning and unfortunately, or perhaps fortunately if you are a Buddhist, there is a path to recovery and redemption. Right? Well yes there is. The idea of redemption — nirvana under Buddhism — is achieving the state of being freed from greed, hate, and delusion."

Think Progress adds, Imus’ co-host Charles McCord tried to defend Hume by arguing that he was merely stating that Buddhism didn’t offer “the kind of path to redemption”; rather, it’s a different path. Imus responded, “But wouldn’t one infer from what he said…is that there was no path to redemption?” “You could,” agreed McCord.

Happy Holidays Part II

2009-12-15T08:48:00.004-06:00

My parents recently took the train into Chicago to visit my husband and I and we took them to the Christmas at DePaul Concert in Lincoln Park. It was a wonderful production, a wonderful experience. For the song O Holy Night, a male tenor (DePaul alumni) sang and it was amazing. More than one tear slipped out of my eye. My nostalgic side was glad to be in a church again with the beautiful architecture; the sculptures, columns and somber lighting.

Afterwards, my mom told me about a spiritual book she was reading and that hearing the chorus and orchestra culminated for her the message of her book. Basically, someone asks "Why are there so many faiths?" And the answer is analogized with the orchestra comparison: it takes many differently crafted, differently sounding instruments to contribute to the masterpiece of the symphony."

This made me smile and so I thought I would share.

Happy Holidays

2009-12-01T09:25:00.002-06:00

It has been a long time between posts but I have to say that I am grateful for being busy – new home, graduate school, a job I like, etc. – and it is this time of year when people tend to outline those things they are grateful for. That is a long list for me. I am grateful for everything. Every. Thing. I can only feel the overwhelming gratitude in my heart and have it swell up and out to touch others who don’t feel that heart-swell in their lives. In lieu of holiday gift-giving, I am going to make a nice donation to the Chicago Food Depository. There are others who need extra care at this time of the year – and all year-round!

And while I don't attend mass, this is the time of year when I get a little nostalgic about it. I miss the ambience, candles and incense and music, but I know it is all theatrics. Those giant stone cathedrals are like the tomb. All the important witnessing, miracles and message of Christ play out OUTSIDE of these Municipal City Halls.

Mark 16: 1-8 - "You are looking for Jesus the Nazarene, who was crucified. He has risen. He is not here."

Happy Holidays and Blessings to all!