Yeah, MAMBLA sounds like a Brazilian dance club.
Did the scoundrel and villain Shanley help found NAMBLA? Just wow.
So what do you want from me here? You do get that my question to TSgt was a bitter joke mocking the my even more ill-tempered than myself co-religionists, right?
Sometimes I get the impression that you all think it’s a great surprise to us that a lot of priests and a significant number of bishops are dopes, and worse.
But when I was 11 and first detected what I thought was a “call’ to orders (and maybe it was), I knew ->I<- was far too foul a sinner to ever think I deserved in any way to be a clergyd00d.
These days I joke that when the Church comes to her sense and elects me pope, my motto will be, “But wait! There’s MORE!”
But even in my pubescent callowness I thought my moot should be, “Don’t confuse the salesman with the product.”
Pipes shot through with rust can still deliver clear and sweet water. While I happen to love my current crop of Friars, I don’t go to church for THEM. I go for Jesus. I went when the priests were heretical dopes, and I go when they’re good, pious, and learned friends. I go for Jesus, not for them.
No, we're not surprised that you are aware of it. Nor are we surprised that Catholics for the most part, won't even acknowledge it.
It sure would be nice to hear many of your fellow Catholics recognize it. A simple, *Yup, the Catholic church history is nothing to brag about. They were wrong.* would go a long way.
Of course, I doubt that many would go as far as saying they were doing what they could to fix it and try to get it back on track, not wanting to wear the label of *reformer*.
The last group of people trying to fix up the RCC didn't fare so well at its hands.
The Pharisees were proud of their long history and their illustrious forefather Abraham, proclaiming,
“We (speaking only of themselves, not that “accursed people”) are Abraham's offspring and have never been slaves to anyone” and “Our father is Abraham”. (John 8:33, 39).
Yet Jesus said their ACTIONS showed them to be children of their real father, the Devil. (John 8:44)
All that fell on deaf ears even though some of the Pharisees did become followers of Jesus. Yet to do so they had to give up being Pharisees.
The Pharisees said they were “disciples of Moses” (John 9:28) and arrogantly asserted they needed no one to instruct THEM, unlike those “altogether born in sins”. (John 9:34)
But were these just a few “bad apples that don't spoil the whole barrel” or were they a few drops of kerosene in a jug of wine that did spoil the whole?
Jesus was not talking to the few when he said,
“Look!, your house is abandoned to you”. (Matt. 23:37)
What could that possibly mean? The nation of Israel had a covenant with God, it had the only acceptable center of worship and sacrifice, it had THE Temple of God, it had a priestly line, the Law “transmitted by the hand of angels”.
The religious leaders had learned nothing from what took place in 607 b.c. so now the covenant would be fulfilled by someone other than that “house” and 70 c.e. made clear what being “abandoned” by God meant. Those who disregarded Jesus’ warning about “getting out of her” perished.
The lesson is inescapable. God doesn't abandon His people but He alone defines who constitutes “His people”.
Rusty pipes or sewer pipes? It makes a difference.
Wise perspective for any denomination, congregation.
Wise perspective for any denomination, congregation.