← Autodidact Archive · Original Dissent · vytis
Thread ID: 16134 | Posts: 24 | Started: 2004-12-31
2004-12-31 16:47 | User Profile
"By their cunning, the Jews instigated the French Revolution in order to gain civic equality, and thence they insinuated themselves into key positions in most state economies with the aim of controlling them and establishing their virulent campaigns against Christianity...Jews were the race that nauseates..."
Quote from the leading Jesuit journal 'Civilta Cattolica' dated 1890<
vytis, 'Wer kennt den Jude kennt den Teufel'
2004-12-31 23:54 | User Profile
[color=black][font=Times New Roman][size=3][color=black]It is widely known the Jews financed [/color][color=black][font=Times New Roman]Napoleon and the [/font][/color][/size][color=black][font=Times New Roman][size=3]Duke of Wellington while they were at war with each other. It is quite possible they did this so they could eliminate the British Royal Family and the French Royal Family (they ended up doing this). The Jews want to enslave White Christians, but as long as the Royal Families are around they won't take us all[/size][size=2]![/size][/font][color=black]<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />
[left][/color][/left]
2005-01-01 00:07 | User Profile
Nothing new about all this, the Jews are behind 80% of all the wars and conflicts in this world, including the US civil war, and later on out of this world when we conquer space.
2005-01-01 14:09 | User Profile
Nothing new? That's a for sure!
Just want to point out that before the Catholic Church was completely neutered and infiltrated by child molesters and perverts, it posed the greatest opposition and check-mate to Jewish hegemony.
In my opinion it's still the only visible church organization on this planet they fear.
2005-01-01 14:14 | User Profile
[QUOTE=vytis]Nothing new? That's a for sure!
Just want to point out that before the Catholic Church was completely neutered and infiltrated by child molesters and perverts, it posed the greatest opposition and check-mate to Jewish hegemony.
In my opinion it's still the only visible church organization on this planet they fear.[/QUOTE] Too right, I find it quite sad how the Catholic Church has become prey to Child Molesters and perverts...and I am not even Catholic.
2005-01-01 19:09 | User Profile
Sad is putting it too mildly FTT....How about criminal????
2005-01-02 07:17 | User Profile
[QUOTE=vytis]Sad is putting it too mildly FTT....How about criminal????[/QUOTE] Of course, I just thought it would be obvious to most people that it is criminal. Just from a Religious point it is sad, that the house of God has been attacked within it's own walls.
2005-01-03 05:22 | User Profile
[QUOTE=vytis]>Quote from the leading Jesuit journal 'Civilta Cattolica' dated 1890< [/QUOTE] Sounds like Dreyfus affair era Jesuits. Problem with Catholicism today is 1890's Catholics are all dead, and for Protestants who question the eternal transcendent truth found in the ecclesiastical structure, that leaves only what we have today, which isn't worth much.
2005-01-03 14:48 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Free The Truth]Too right, I find it quite sad how the Catholic Church has become prey to Child Molesters and perverts...and I am not even Catholic.[/QUOTE]
I've come to believe that the greatest disaster of the 20th century was not one of the big wars or even the genocides, but rather Vatican II.
What a mess. The Catholic Church went from being the most impressive non-state organization on Earth (unless you count Vatican City as a state, which is pushing it I think) to being a pitiful and reviled shadow of itself. In a few short years we went from packed churches and seminaries to total demoralization and chaos. And it all came about due to the coup d'etat staged by a tightly organized and fanatically committed group of heretics burrowed deep within the clergy.
Vatican II marked the destruction of one of the mainstays of western civilization, and may yet entail the loss of the West itself.
Walter
2005-01-03 15:17 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Walter Yannis]I've come to believe that the greatest disaster of the 20th century was not one of the big wars or even the genocides, but rather Vatican II.
What a mess. The Catholic Church went from being the most impressive non-state organization on Earth (unless you count Vatican City as a state, which is pushing it I think) to being a pitiful and reviled shadow of itself. In a few short years we went from packed churches and seminaries to total demoralization and chaos. And it all came about due to the coup d'etat staged by a tightly organized and fanatically committed group of heretics burrowed deep within the clergy.
Vatican II marked the destruction of one of the mainstays of western civilization, and may yet entail the loss of the West itself.
Walter[/QUOTE] True, very true! Sadly this kind of thing isn't just in the blood of the Catholic Church but all mainstream Churches.
2005-01-03 17:54 | User Profile
Free the Truth and Vytis,
First off, let us not get carried away. The number of clergy involved in child abuse is a small percentage of the clergy (estimates are 2%). But let me remind you, even this small overall percentage is made up of mostly homosexual priests preying upon (no pun intended) adolescent males. Imagine this, let's say you had tens of thousands of heterosexual clergy alone with adolescent girls-- 13 to 17. Now, imagine further that the lowered or even non-existent laws and social stigma for young males engaging in sexual activity is also the case with adolescent girls. Do you believe it's possible that as may as 2% of these single heterosexual men around these young, sexually-developed adolescent girls might give in to their temptation? Bill Maher has joked about how men are attracted to adolescent girls and 'age of consent' laws are just to keep men from preyng upon them. So, you might now see why alot of Catholics are talking about this child abuse issue as a scandal of homosexuality in the priesthood. If having priests marry will reduce the number of homosexual priests and return the Catholic priesthood to a heterosexual profession, I am all for it.
Secondly, the Catholic Church is not the Pope, cardinals, priests, and religious (i.e., nuns, brothers, sisters), it is the 1.3 billion Roman Catholics throughout the world, just as America is not the President, congressmen and women, senators and justices. It's funny, but when 2% of the Catholic priesthood is involved in scandal, the Catholic Church is deemed corrupt, but when a number of U.S. congressmen and senators, even the President of the United States is involved in scandal no one ever says the United States is corrupt or the United States is mired in scandal. And I might add, the government of the United States is much more a part of the definition of United States than the hierarchy is in the definition of the Roman Catholic Church.
Also, before you write another obituary for the Church of Rome let me remind you that she has with exception for 2000 years always buried her undertakers.
2005-01-03 18:09 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Jack Cassidy]Free the Truth and Vytis,
First off, let us not get carried away. The number of clergy involved in child abuse is a small percentage of the clergy (estimates are 2%). But let me remind you, even this small overall percentage is made up of mostly homosexual priests preying upon (no pun intended) adolescent males. Imagine this, let's say you had tens of thousands of heterosexual clergy alone with adolescent girls-- 13 to 17. Now, imagine further that the lowered or even non-existent laws and social stigma for young males engaging in sexual activity is also the case with adolescent girls. Do you believe it's possible that as may as 2% of these single heterosexual men around these young, sexually-developed adolescent girls might give in to their temptation? Bill Maher has joked about how men are attracted to adolescent girls and 'age of consent' laws are just to keep men from preyng upon them. So, you might now see why alot of Catholics are talking about this child abuse issue as a scandal of homosexuality in the priesthood. If having priests marry will reduce the number of homosexual priests and return the Catholic priesthood to a heterosexual profession, I am all for it.
Secondly, the Catholic Church is not the Pope, cardinals, priests, and religious (i.e., nuns, brothers, sisters), it is the 1.3 billion Roman Catholics throughout the world, just as America is not the President, congressmen and women, senators and justices. It's funny, but when 2% of the Catholic priesthood is involved in scandal, the Catholic Church is deemed corrupt, but when a number of U.S. congressmen and senators, even the President of the United States is involved in scandal no one ever says the United States is corrupt or the United States is mired in scandal. And I might add, the government of the United States is much more a part of the definition of United States than the hierarchy is in the definition of the Roman Catholic Church.
Also, before you write another obituary for the Church of Rome let me remind you that she has with exception for 2000 years always buried her undertakers.[/QUOTE] That 2% is 2% too much! And remember our Jewish enemies will use that 2% to portray the Church in a bad way.
2005-01-03 18:30 | User Profile
JC I am Catholic (Traditional)! But I will always voice my opinion against church leaders when I see a wrong.
Regards, vytis 'The Armour of God Begins With Truth'
2005-01-04 06:39 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Free The Truth]That 2% is 2% too much! And remember our Jewish enemies will use that 2% to portray the Church in a bad way.[/QUOTE] Agreed. But I think the Gospels gives ample attention to the fact that human beings are corrupt, and in spite of even being chosen by God directly, they will either turn their back (Peter) or betray and conspire to kill (Judas). Judas, who was chosen directly by God-- who better to vet?-- betrays Him and is complicit in His murder. So, under the direct leadership of Jesus Christ, at least 1/12 or 8% of the Church was involved in perhaps the worst of activity... the murder of God!
Nonetheless I agree with you. If it were up to me I would burn them at the stake, in preparation for their eternal destination.
2005-01-04 06:50 | User Profile
[QUOTE=vytis]JC I am Catholic (Traditional)! But I will always voice my opinion against church leaders when I see a wrong.
Regards, vytis 'The Armour of God Begins With Truth'[/QUOTE] Understood and agreed. IMO, in the [short-term] end I think this whole humiliating and outrageous scandal will be good for the Catholic Church, since it's put the kibosh on smug clericalism and forced many Catholics to re-examine their faith and reasons for their faith (always a good thing and invariably leads people to further educate themselves in the faith).
2005-01-04 11:52 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Jack Cassidy]Understood and agreed. IMO, in the [short-term] end I think this whole humiliating and outrageous scandal will be good for the Catholic Church, since it's put the kibosh on smug clericalism and forced many Catholics to re-examine their faith and reasons for their faith (always a good thing and invariably leads people to further educate themselves in the faith).[/QUOTE]
We need to allow priests to marry. The celibacy rule for all clergy is merely a disciplinary measure and is not a matter of doctrine. It made sense as an anti-simony measure way back when, but it makes no sense now.
The celibacy thing attracts faggots to the priesthood. My experience indicates that a majority of Catholic priests are homosexual in orientation, although most try hard to keep their vows. The problem with having a large concentration of homosexuals in the clergy is that they take on an "us versus them" mentality. They begin to see themselves not as servants of the married laity but rather as a special class with its own rights that must be protected and advanced from the heterosexual majority that fails to understand them. This phenomenon has cost us dearly. I've heard many priests preach against Biblical and Magisterial dogma in regard to sexual morality.
Imagine if suddenly there were no more American priests and the Catholic Church in America decided to import only Philippino priests. Surely their ethnicity would become a factor in the clergy's collective relationship with the laity. It's just human nature. We'd begin to hear about the wonders of Phillipino culture and how it's actually superior to American culture and yadda yadda yadda. Same with homosexuals. Their sexual oreintation is a deep part of their identity, and human nature dicates that they'll feel a tribal kinship to their fellow poofters that will trump their loyalty to the majority.
Ergo, in order to facilitate solidarity between the clergy and the laity, the clergy must marry and have children.
Which brings me to the real pay-out for the laity. They don't have to support families, but only one man. We laity have to accept some responsibility for this mess, too, since we want our clerical services on the cheap. But it turns out that you get what you pay for, no surprises there.
2005-01-04 14:58 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Walter Yannis]We need to allow priests to marry. [/QUOTE]
I agree Walter. Like so many of your fellow Wisconsins, you should just become Lutheran. :)
Just kidding, before any fights break out.
2005-01-04 17:05 | User Profile
For once Walter is completely wrong.
Celibacy has both practical and spiritual advantages. Practically, it allows women to see priests as impartial and detached--more able to see things from their perspective. It also allows a priest to be sent here or there on a moment's notice, without any need to consider the effect on his family.
Spiritually, it also gives the priest and the Church credibility. They ask nothing of the laity that they don't ask of themselves in the realm of physical discipline and denial. They also set a marvelous and critical example in a time of decadence, such as we have today.
The problems in the Church stem from Vatican II, the New Mass, and the corrupt generation of bishops we have today. Prior to these, the Church was bursting at the seams, as was the priesthood. Dropping celibacy won't change anything, but will lower the standards of the priesthood at a time when the standard is already quite low.
2005-01-04 18:12 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Buster]Celibacy has both practical and spiritual advantages. Practically, it allows women to see priests as impartial and detached--more able to see things from their perspective. It also allows a priest to be sent here or there on a moment's notice, without any need to consider the effect on his family.
Spiritually, it also gives the priest and the Church credibility. They ask nothing of the laity that they don't ask of themselves in the realm of physical discipline and denial. They also set a marvelous and critical example in a time of decadence, such as we have today.[/QUOTE] Buster, both you and Walter make excellent points, as usual. I think the Orthodox have a fairly good compromise, which is as follows. 1. Priests can be married and have children, or they may be celibate. However, they must be married before they are ordained, and they cannot remarry (if widowed, for example) once they are ordained. 2. Monks must be celibate. 3. The Church hierarchy (archbishops, metropolitans, patriarchs) is drawn from the ranks of the monks and celibate priests.
This system confers many of the benefits of both a celibate and a married clergy.
2005-01-05 06:01 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Quantrill]Buster, both you and Walter make excellent points, as usual. I think the Orthodox have a fairly good compromise, which is as follows. 1. Priests can be married and have children, or they may be celibate. However, they must be married before they are ordained, and they cannot remarry (if widowed, for example) once they are ordained. 2. Monks must be celibate. 3. The Church hierarchy (archbishops, metropolitans, patriarchs) is drawn from the ranks of the monks and celibate priests.
This system confers many of the benefits of both a celibate and a married clergy.[/QUOTE]
You are right on these and I'll add one small clarification: a widower can become archbishop and above.
I think the one practical advantage of always having married priests in the Church is they keep an eye out for perverts among the clergy, thus making the existance of any homosexual cabal much more unlikely. The fact that the priesthood of the Orthodox Church is NOT plagued by pedophiles and homosexuals should speak for itself.
Personally, I never saw where a married priest was less effective than an unmarried one.
Besides that, as I recall, the whole celibacy thing in the RCC came about mainly because of clergymen engaging in nepotism and tying-up church properties into their families' estates.
2005-01-05 13:46 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Quantrill]Buster, both you and Walter make excellent points, as usual. I think the Orthodox have a fairly good compromise, which is as follows. 1. Priests can be married and have children, or they may be celibate. However, they must be married before they are ordained, and they cannot remarry (if widowed, for example) once they are ordained. 2. Monks must be celibate. 3. The Church hierarchy (archbishops, metropolitans, patriarchs) is drawn from the ranks of the monks and celibate priests.
This system confers many of the benefits of both a celibate and a married clergy.[/QUOTE]
I agree with that. The Orthodox recognize that there is a celibate calling (St. Paul expressed an appreciation for priestly celibacy, and also in Revelation, the male virgins who follow the Lamb whereever He goes). At the same time the Orthodox have avoided the pitfalls of celibacy.
I agree with Buster that Vatican II was the source of the decay, but at the same time we have to deal with the world as we find it. The unavoidable fact is that a majority of our priests are homosexual in orientation (judging by my considerable experience) and this is simply not tenable. We need to attack the problem at the roots. Accommodation should be made for the few men and women called to the celibate life of total service, but at the same time we need to promote solidarity between clergy and laity by making the clergy most in contact with families family men themselves.
A note to Wild Bill: I have a couple of colleagues, one who handles a lot of cases for one of the big Orthodox denominations in the States, the other who does a lot of work for the Seventh Day Adventists. Both of these denominations allow married clergy, and both have plenty of problems, including child molestation. Sexuality is just one of those things that trip up people, and while a strong religious committment no doubt helps limit human failure in this regard, it is no guarantee against it. The clergy occupy a unique position of personal trust, and routinely find themselves in situations with the most vulnerable of the flock. A moment of weakness can happen to anybody (not to excuse them from responsibility for it, of course) and you'd be amazed at how often clerical sexual escapdes lead to heartache.
The thing about the Orthodox and the SDA cases is that they tend to be more NORMAL - usually a priest or minister cheating on his wife with a younger parishoner, but I know of child molestation cases, usually with underaged girls. The thing about the Catholic scandal is that it's overwhelmingly SODOMITE in orientation, and then these cases usually involve a priest and an adolescent boy.
Cleansing the Catholic clergy of sodomites will improve the situation, but it won't cure basic human weakness.
Walter
2005-01-05 14:08 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Walter Yannis] A note to Wild Bill: I have a couple of colleagues, one who handles a lot of cases for one of the big Orthodox denominations in the States, the other who does a lot of work for the Seventh Day Adventists. Both of these denominations allow married clergy, and both have plenty of problems, including child molestation. Sexuality is just one of those things that trip up people, and while a strong religious committment no doubt helps limit human failure in this regard, it is no guarantee against it. The clergy occupy a unique position of personal trust, and routinely find themselves in situations with the most vulnerable of the flock. A moment of weakness can happen to anybody (not to excuse them from responsibility for it, of course) and you'd be amazed at how often clerical sexual escapdes lead to heartache.
The thing about the Orthodox and the SDA cases is that they tend to be more NORMAL - usually a priest or minister cheating on his wife with a younger parishoner, but I know of child molestation cases, usually with underaged girls. The thing about the Catholic scandal is that it's overwhelmingly SODOMITE in orientation, and then these cases usually involve a priest and an adolescent boy.
[/QUOTE]
I have no doubt that such cases exist. We're all sinners - even clergymen, although I think they must be held to a higher standard because of their position.
I agree with your point that where married clergy exists, sexual misconduct is, so to say, conventional and across the board, whereas the Catholic cases are almost exclusively pedophilic and homosexual.
I know the jurisdiction of my parish set up rules for priests so as to not only prevent opportunities for abuse, but to avoid circumstances that allow a mere suspicion.
2005-01-06 00:28 | User Profile
I agree with all that has been said here. I part company with the far-right (i.e., "The Wanderer") Catholics who defend celibacy and say this priest homosexual and child abuse scandal is not related to it. Celibacy is not a doctrine of the Catholic Church but a mere practice. For this much damage to be done to Ecclesia Sancta Mater for non-doctrinal reasons-- and the subsequent defense of celibacy in light of it!!-- is staggering. Before looking to the Orthodox Church for a successful model, remember that within the fold of the Roman Catholic Church we have, and have had for a very long time, a married priesthood (e.g., all the Uniates: Ukrainian Catholics, Maronite Catholics, et al.). I have talked with Ukrainian Catholic seminarians and they agree that it's insane in this day and age to keep the celibacy practice in the Latin Rite Catholic Church. They also reference the conspicuous homosexuality in the Latin Rite priesthood and the child abuse scandals and believe that this is a result of the celibacy practice. IMO celibacy doesn't cause child abuse, but it obviously leads to a homosexualization of the clergy and its ranks over the decades which in turn leads to more and more cases of sexual engagement with minors-- forced and/or coerced. What is perhaps most bothersome in the homosexualization of the priesthood is that normal young males will feel uncomfortable being around other men he perceives as homosexual, while homosexual men are more or less comfortable being around heterosexual men. What this means is that as the Catholic Church has had more and more normal young men leave the novitiate/seminary the more homosexual the priesthood has become, which in turn leads to more straight-flight, and so on. Now we read in Michael Rose's book Goodbye Good Men that most of the prominent Catholic seminaries have become "pink palaces". Alas, the damage will continue for some time to come, be fortunately we know that in the end Christ's True Church will prevail.
A humorous and related anecdote:
One of the C.S. Lewis's students at Oxford, the writer Christopher Derrick, converted to Catholicism. One of the reasons he gave for his conversion was the unrelenting corruption and scandal that has plagued the Church of Rome for two millennia. As an Oxford student of history he was intimately aware of all of the early, medieval, and modern corruption and scandal in the Catholic Church and as a result he knew that no such organization could survive years, let alone millennia, if it were not truly divine.
2005-01-18 22:17 | User Profile
Thanks for your input, Jack.
I would reiterate that, as I see it, the problems stem from the New Mass, Vatican II (especially with regard to religious liberty and ecumenism), and the series of weak Popes we have had since 1958. If these can be corrected, I will then accept criticism of the situation that ensues.