Priest Found Hanged

Nando Times ^ | 05/16/02 | Stephen Manning

[HowlinglyMind-BendingAbsurdity]

re: Akita

That's the one. Thanks. EWTN ran a documentary ("Hill of Redemption")recently which discussed this in part. Interesting stuff. Curious coincidences, right?

Deo gratias.

[HiTech RedNeck]

The Constitution of the Universe rests on six axioms

You ain't exactly Thomas Jefferson in a space suit, bub.

[streetpreacher]

Is that a Vulcan document? I swear I see Spock's fingerprints all over it.

[streetpreacher]

I remember reading of a seer who was given to understand that when a priest goes to hell, his thumbs and forefingers burn brighter than any other part of his body.

Really??? Could you explain that one? Or do I really want to know... heh.

[HowlinglyMind-BendingAbsurdity]

Yeah. It's all still around. Deal Hudson had Crisis run an article on the Enneagram a few years back. Weird stuff. What's a little disturbing is that some of this stuff can seem interesting on a certain level. I think the problem is blurring it with the religious and theological context. If Psych professors and researchers want to study ths stuff, fine. It's the presentation of it as equivalent to the Gospel truth, and as certainly true in a scientific sense, which makes it so nutty. There is a gradual process of denudating Catholicism of its proper sacramental and New Testament focus and replacing it with flaky New Age psychobabble and nonsense. Then - whoops! - in come the 300-pound lesbian liturgical dancers and it all becomes just another circus.

[Slyfox]

I've met priests who practically sneer in disdain at the mention of anything holy or sacramental or having to do with God's absolute truth.

The new priest taking over our parish was told some friends of mine that he did not believe in the transubstantiation.

[Zon]

I wrote it wasn't my point, not, "it wasn't my point". Why the mischaracterization? There obviously was a point? Of course, I am not obliged to "belabor the point". Get the point? Best wishes.

What is the point that you may or may no elaborate on? As far as I can tell from what you have replied is that your mind is mush. That is not an attack rather the impression I got from your obfuscation. I asked a very simple question in which I had no idea whatsoever that you would have such difficulty answering.

[HowlinglyMind-BendingAbsurdity]

re: "did not believe..."

You have to ask the question at some point WHY people who don't believe the stuff select this as their vocational career option. What is it exactly and precisely that they think they are engaged in? They want to use the prestige, aura, and power of the office to advance some other ideology? Which is what, one wonders?

[streetpreacher]

I don't understand the difficulty in the Scripture. It seems to speak clearly for itself. It speaks of "vain babblings" and "false science (or false knowledge)". I contend that what you have written amounts to such. This is not an attack either, simply a "pointed" observation...

[HowlinglyMind-BendingAbsurdity]

At first I thought it was my friend Jerry (an extreme reactionary conservative Catholic Traditionalist monarchist)doing a parody of some atheist-materialist hedonic cult's gibberish. But it's not actually a joke, right?

[streetpreacher]

Why do you try to paint yourself as "non-religious"? Your views are more "mystical" than anything in Christianity (which is based in reason). You are obviously into some New Age cult.

[streetpreacher]

Sheesh!! How do you analytically read through all of that stuff without losing your sanity?

I'd be pounding the desk in a sheer fit of brain drainage just to get through one paragraph!

[HowlinglyMind-BendingAbsurdity]

However interesting this philosophical debate may be, to the extent it has no bearing on the current Catholic scandals and intra-church problems (the subject of this thread),I am going to propose the polite and civil request to start another thread dedicated to this philosophical debate topic. I can recommend Copleston's multi-volume History of Philosophy, the archived proceedings of the ACPA, and Von Hayek's critical analysis of scientism for additional tangents.

Thanks for the input and God Bless in your quests. Or Good Luck, as the case may be.

[saradippity]

I cannot believe that you can love others as God has loved you unless you first love God. That is the order of the commandments and that order is what is lacking in the presentation these days.With a better understanding of the first commandment the second becomes clear and the love we are called to is nothing like that fuzzy little warm feeling that we desire to experience.

I believe one of the major mistakes of Vatican II was forgetting the Baltimore Catechism and looking to "experience" God.He gave us a mind to know Him,a heart to love Him and a body to serve Him.Once we get that straight,its pretty easy. I must admit it did take me a while to get it straight after dallying with the new church and rationalizing sinful behavior,I woke up and realized that what I was taught as a child was Truth,I had been reprogrammed and it took a big thwack upside the head to bring me back.And,for that I am grateful to God.

[HiTech RedNeck]

Surely it is a joke!... "For Romantic Love; Power; Money"

[streetpreacher]

Good call. I for one have no desire to take part in such an endeavor though. The thought of even entertaining such a debate seriously would be a howlingly mind-bending absurdity... just kidding.

[HowlinglyMind-BendingAbsurdity]

Hey, that Mount Carmel Spiritual Centre is a pretty piece of real estate. If they ever go belly up, let me know. Some worthy orthodox Catholic outfit could make good use of it as a school or college.