This is why people hate Christianity and Christians...

[Fryk]

*sigh* Apparently, we're using different standards of 'loosely organized.'

Do they have a single person who can talk for a parish? Yeah, the priest.
completely.

Wrong. Totally wrong. You are thinking of Catholics, NOT protestants. There is ABSOLUTELY NO parish priest for all protestants. None. Whatsoever. There are Baptist deacons, Methodist bishops, and the like, but they don't report to each other. Ever. They are wholly separate organizations with their own separate heirarchies. No Lutheran reverend will ever report to a Pentecostal bishop, or vice versa. They are completely autonomous from each other. AND they are totally divorced from Catholic priests. Hell, the Orthodox churches separated from the catholics in the 14th century. The Reformation, which started the whole protestant snowball, began in 1517. They've been separated from each other for a long, long, long, long, long, long, long, long, etc. time.

[Slytovhand]

Firstly, I'll go with the current argument - Fryk, you're mis-reading what BJ is saying. He's suggesting that in any town, all the similar religious priesthoods should have some awareness of what all the others are doing if it's going to hit the media! So, if it does hit the media, Priest X ought to get together with priest's Z,Y,A, B and C to have a unilateral letter of condemnation done up for the media... and for those priests to also have a chat with their higher ups so that they then also do something similar! Otherwise, it just seems to get ignored, and we've seen how that ends.

Next - Ree - sorry, but the Catholic Church has a massively bad history when it comes to doing bad shit to people - and then covering it up! It still happens in Australia. So, when another one comes out, yes, I find it very difficult to accept that the entirety of the Roman Catholic church laity will just idly accept such things... as against demand some really serious action! and, for that matter, why they choose to still support a church whose leaders will still condone such cover-ups (and yes, they are condoning them... cos they keep happening!)

But, as for your comment on it being ok for a thread to start up with 'Another reason why people hate Muslims' when a bunch of terrorists blow something up.. yeah, I don't see a great problem with that... it'll get flamed,and they'll get a stack of shit thrown at them for it, but I can see a thread starting......

And lastly, just to add to BK's post with links... Pagans can do it!

[Fryk]

I think I see now, Slyt, thanks.

The problem, though, is that that sort of cooperation isn't done, either. Although I think it SHOULD be. The problem is, even in denominations, where the theology lines up nearly 99% of the time, that last 1% means that people who don't belong to YOUR version of "christianity" are still going to hell. It's infuriating, and it's bullshit. One of the main reasons why I left the whole putrid mess a while ago.
The only point I'll argue here is that , even if the local religious posse got together and wrote up such a note, you'd never see it anywhere but in a letters to the editor section of a newspaper. And if you look, such letters are there all the time, at least in the cities I've lived in in my life (11 so far, apparently I was born a ramblin' man). Letters like that, from any faith, are usually treated with as much enthusiasm as a correction in a newspaper-- usually hidden somewhere near the Lockhornes cartoon.

[RecoveringKinkoid]

Why not, the Bible does it all the time.
The term Gentile comes to mind...

.

Well, wait a minute here. Does that mean, then, that it's okay?

Cool.

This is why people hate Jews and Judaism.
This is why people hate Muslims and Islam.
This is why people hate blacks, mexicans, and gypsies.
This is why they hate gays and homosexuality.

Let's not split hairs, here.

[HYHYBT]

The problem is, even in denominations, where the theology lines up nearly 99% of the time, that last 1% means that people who don't belong to YOUR version of "christianity" are still going to hell. It's infuriating, and it's bullshit. One of the main reasons why I left the whole putrid mess a while ago.

there are such churches, but it's hardly all of them.

[RecoveringKinkoid]

See, I don't get that. Why do you care what other people think about what you believe?

I hear that all the time. "I don't go to church because everyone there is a hypocrite.

So? What if they are? What does that have to do with you?

[Pedersen]

So? What if they are? What does that have to do with you?

I think that Broom answered this question quite succinctly:

"Lie down with dogs, and wake up with fleas."

People who don't go to church because they feel it's full of hypocrites don't want to be labeled hypocrites themselves. Or they don't want to associate with such blatant hypocrisy. Or a combination of the two (don't want to deal with such blatant hypocrisy and don't want to be labeled hypocrites themselves).

Nothing too odd there, really.

[Ree]

My own personal relationship with God has nothing to do with the person in the next pew, and theirs has nothing to do with me.

I don't actually attend church to keep an eye on how they're behaving.

I attend my Catholic service because I actually get something out of it.
From the opening hymn, with voices united in praise, to the sign of the cross, through the opening prayers, and on to the scriptures, the homily, the breaking of bread and the receiving of the Holy Eucharist, the closing prayers, and the final hymn, I find meaning in all of it that helps me to live my life.

Could I leave the Catholic church and go to one that seems more socially acceptable and has come under less scrutiny and controversy?
Probably...but why should I?

My Catholic Mass has meaning to me.

In another church, I wouldn't find all of those things that speak to me.

So, go ahead and accuse me of lying down with dogs. I can deal with the fleas.

[RecoveringKinkoid]

Yeah, that is pretty much what I'm saying.

I mean, I quit a church when I was in my twenties because the clergy was laying down some serious stuff I couldn't stand by. I didn't want to sit there and by my continued attendance, give the illusion that I was okay with what was being said and practiced. And the main body of that part of the denomination was doing some pretty seriously messed up (in my opionion) stuff also. So I expressed my dismay by removing my membership. And then going out and finding a denomination and congregation I felt better about.

However, other worshippers, sitting in church for whatever reason they are there? Not for me to judge or concern myself with. If we were perfect we wouldn't need to be there in the first place.

I don't buy that stuff where people say they don't go because of the other people there. What an incredibly arrogant thing to say. Those people just dont' want to go, and that's fine. Why they are so loathe to just admit it is beyond me.

[Pedersen]

I don't buy that stuff where people say they don't go because of the other people there. What an incredibly arrogant thing to say. Those people just dont' want to go, and that's fine. Why they are so loathe to just admit it is beyond me.

So, it is your expressly stated belief that people who have said they don't want to go because of not wishing to deal with the hypocrisy they see are being arrogant?

In other words, you're stating they these people, when asked "Why?" are being completely arrogant, instead of just saying "I don't want to"?

And they're arrogant? I'll grant that you did not call yourself arrogant for dictating what the people who have problems with those specific congregations should do, but it is fairly strongly implied that you are not calling yourself the same thing.

Which manages to make for an interesting double standard you've got going on there.

[RecoveringKinkoid]

Yeah. It's pretty arrogant to sit there and make a judgement call on the guy in next pew because of what you've decided about his life and why he's there. Especially when you don't know what is going on in that guy's life and in his spirit.

And I'll tell you something else you won't be suprised to find out.

I'm pretty freaking arrogant myself. But not because I'm doing that.

[Ree]

And I'll tell you something else you won't be suprised to find out.

I'm pretty freaking arrogant myself. But not because I'm doing that.

Gotta love the self awareness and honesty.
That's rare around here. LOL

[Fryk]

I find it very interesting that in this subsection of the board, right below this thread at the time of my writing this, in fact, there is an re people arguing that one shouldn't lump all scientologists together just because the Co$ leadership is doing some pretty shady things. But in this thread, if one lies with the dogs, one gets up with fleas.

[Slytovhand]

I find it very interesting that in this subsection of the board, right below this thread at the time of my writing this, in fact, there is an re people arguing that one shouldn't lump all scientologists together just because the Co$ leadership is doing some pretty shady things. But in this thread, if one lies with the dogs, one gets up with fleas.

Very true!

Only difference is - the Catholics have stopped harrassing, intimidating, and doing other nasty stuff to those who choose to leave the flock... the Co$ is still doing it

Otherwise I'd have to totally be with you on that one!

[Anthony K. S.]

This entire discussion reminded me of a storyline that R. K. Milholland did in his Something Positive webcomic about three years ago. And one strip in particular :


Something Positive - October 19, 2006


"Never confuse the faith with the supposedly faithful."

It's a good message . . . and so are R. K. Milholland's comments at the bottom.