I agree. And oppose it, through encouraging everyone to clarify their own respective values, such as to be able to stand by their very strengths.
On May 17, 5:00 pm, rigsy03 <[email protected]> wrote: > This was nothing new. Consider pharohs, Alexander, Roman emperors up > through the Emperor of Japan-WWII. All declared gods. The notion of > "divinity" and practice of absolutism is not confined to religion, > unfortunately, but seeped into the secular world, as well. > > On May 15, 9:29 am, vamadevananda <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > This wasn't about placing them on a high pedestal. It was about their > > subscription to moribund morality, unmindful of the rampant hypocrisy > > that resulted ... all largely at the dictates of the ( socially > > organised ) Church. > > > On May 15, 9:07 am, rigsy03 <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Some Victorians were a racey bunch of hypocrites. I have no idea why > > > they are placed on such pedestals of virtue- it must have something to > > > do with the way they dressed and furnished their homes and tidied up > > > their empires.At any rate, I think some of my reactions are due to the > > > immediacy of bad news where before news was harder to come by.So, yes, > > > I see some progress while I see more of the same. Why is that "wrong"? > > > > On May 13, 8:25 am, vamadevananda <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > You are wrong, in suggesting that there is no solution. It's actually > > > > easy, when you see how others have done it, are doing it ! > > > > > We have to be more transparent, balanced and true to oneself. But not, > > > > as you might believe, just about sex. We do not have to reduce the > > > > value of sex, nor is sex in commerce any deterrent to a solution. That > > > > others have failed, as have the priests, does not mean that there is > > > > no solution, either. > > > > > The Victorian world no longer exists, except in our minds and > > > > attitudes. The frogs in the well have only to come out and see it as > > > > it is. > > > > > On May 13, 12:34 pm, rigsy03 <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > It's a societal problem that exists beyond the Catholic Church. Every > > > > > day there is a notice of abuse of some sort. What about teachers, > > > > > scout/camp leaders, parents,aides, strangers, etc.? It is about power > > > > > and violation of the young or weak.//The nuns want to be priests and > > > > > they are all too human. as well.// Not sure that there is a solution > > > > > in our highly sexed society- sex is too valuable a commodity and > > > > > selling point for commerce. > > > > > > On May 12, 7:57 pm, 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 -- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text -
