I like this forum and am sorry if I gave you the wrong impression though I suppose there are disagreeable radical hermits who would like it as well! I hope you don't think of me that way but perhaps you do. I have trouble keeping my thoughts and opinions fixed- sometimes I simply must disagree with myself or there's another point of view that alters my own. Usually there is a delayed reaction, a struggle or battle of thoughts and one wins the day. :-)
On May 13, 8:15 am, vamadevananda <[email protected]> wrote: > The craving brings us here. I spoke of how we could be going here on. > Why ? Because I've experienced the goodness of living so ! > > Do you find it disagreeable to you or simply radical, as you seem to > imply ? > > On May 13, 11:58 am, rigsy03 <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > I think humans crave rituals and controls whether in religion, > > military, government, business and so on and would feel rather lost > > without them. Or would all the spiritual hermits twitter? > > > On May 13, 1:43 am, vamadevananda <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Religion, as an organised and institutionalised entity, has no place > > > in 21st Century ! > > > > However, religion as an idea, a practice or way of life, could be in > > > the public domain, as an option ... leaving the rest up to the > > > individual ... if, whether, what and the how of it. For which, all > > > freedoms and responsibility should rest with the individual. There > > > could be churches or mosques or temples, even priests. But no > > > organised hierarchy, no back seat drivers, no accumulation of wealth, > > > money or power. No flock. No shepherd. No calling of faithfuls. > > > > On May 13, 5:57 am, Ash <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > When it's 'cult' leaders people scream for blood. Nevermind, mixed > > > > [symbols]... > > > > > Anyways, I was thinking they should let the nuns be with the priests, > > > > keeping things all in the church but theres the contradiction of > > > > 'natural law' and sex. And again, abuse of authority. Can this be > > > > salvaged? I'm not too sure, perhaps they should just enter the 21st > > > > century like the one in Contact who said, 'You could call me a man of > > > > the cloth. Without the cloth.' > > > > > On 5/12/2010 9:55 AM, vamadevananda wrote: > > > > > > Indeed ! > > > > > > On May 12, 5:48 pm, Pat<[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > >> On 11 May, 21:44, ornamentalmind<[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > >>>http://www.bishop-accountability.org/ > > > > >>> All neatly documented.... > > > > > >> I wonder how many of 'the accused' had actually paid for indulgences. > > > > >> If they did, then 'the Vicar of Christ' has approved their actions by > > > > >> turning the other cheek, i.e., turning his face away. Surely, it's > > > > >> time to impeach the Pope. You'll KNOW it's true, if the New > > > > >> Benedictine Authorised Version has the quote "Come onto me, ye little > > > > >> children" in it. Yeah, OK, I may have churned a few stomachs with > > > > >> that, but, hey, anything goes when you proclaim yourself 'Vicar of > > > > >> Christ'. It's time to lose that office and face the fact that no one > > > > >> can proclaim to be, via creed, 'God incarnate in stead'. It's a > > > > >> title > > > > >> that gives FAR too much license; so the result is licentiousness. > > > > >> What else would you expect?- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text -
