Now I understand that priests *may* have high religious morals but to require a test that is only possible for one sex is awful.

Negative evidence isn't evidence of a negative.

quote:

---

Now it is not normal to be virgin after, well, one's teens.

---

Even in one's teens, by reliable accounts. In that, may I say, I was frustratingly, depressingly abnormal.

Virgins????? Now I must roll of my chair and laugh or cry my guts outs.

Let me get this straight, the Priesthood has been abusing children for what the past 1000 years and now we are going to get technical about virginity??????

quote:

---

Let's not condemn the entire church for that.

---

AW, come on, let's. Please?

Furthermore,
quote:"Now it is not normal to be virgin after, well, one's teens. Not being highly sexual in your reproductive highs is... abnormal"

I'm curious, have you ever had any success with this line?

[ April 13, 2002: Message edited by: Liam McCarthy ]

[ April 13, 2002: Message edited by: Trespasser ]

quote:

---

I wouldn't let a child step in a door of a Catholic Church if I could prevent it, especially a boy, unless accompanied by a responsible adult.

Let me get this straight, the Priesthood has been abusing children for what the past 1000 years and now we are going to get technical about virginity??????

---

Holy crap...how neanderthal can you get? You hear a handful of stories about abuse at the hands of preists and suddenly it's what all priests have been doing for 1000 years? That tops Hedy Fry by a longshot. Come on, fess up: are you Hedy Fry?

quote:

---

If MightyTonewheel showed up more regularly, and read all the posts, s/he wouldn't have to rake over old ground.

---

[ April 16, 2002: Message edited by: clersal ]

There's a whole lotta church teachings that are being ignored while penalizing based on a flawed test. Nothing to say that the woman, even if she did lose her virginity, did it with that guy. Or that they didn't repent later. And besides, wouldn't it be better to get them married so they wouldn't be sinning? Or, I suppose they could just engage in anal sex.

I'm reminded of a bad mini-series on Peter the Great. His wife wouldn't "do it" on their wedding night so he whacked her in the nose and showed the resulting bloody sheets to his fans downstairs. They cheered.

I really don't want to live in that kind of world. It carries the stench of stupidity with it. Men aren't men unless they loose their virginity and women aren't "ladies" unless they demonstrably keep theirs? Boys will be boys and women are either whores or virgins?

quote:

---

Originally posted by annie.victoria:

They should require Catholic priests to provide certificates of [strikeout]virginity[/strikeout] morality.

---

Not that every priest is a bad person, not even by a stretch. But there has obviously been a significant breech of trust in many cases, and the Catholic Church has a long way to go to repair it's image in many people's minds.

[ 11 July 2004: Message edited by: Baldfresh ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by 'lance:
That's either an expression of clinical narcissism, or the most ingenious way to get laid ever devised.

---

I was thinking that if ever there was a case against celibacy.....

[ 15 July 2004: Message edited by: paxamillion ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Relyc:
Rrrrr, that Mrs. McCarthy! She's the worst of the bunch!!
. I feel it's justified considering said institution has tacitly called me things like: whore, sinner, lesser-being and doomed-to-eternal-hellfire for most of my young life.

---

Hmmm. If it is a young life you've lead, as in, if you were born after about 1963, I sincerely doubt the Church has spent much time dooming your to eternal hellfire. Vatican II has some quite juicy documents teaching that there's really no way to say that non-Catholics will go to hell. Go, Vatican II! That's the kind of teaching that sends folks like Mel Gibson over to the Traditionalists, and good riddance.

As for the virginity thing, this priest is way outta line, because there's not a single reference in the present Catechism to any requirement for virginity on entering into marriage. Most couples will just go to confession if they want to "wipe the slate clean" prior to the ceremony, anyway. This seems like it must be a strictly cultural thing. And not all Catholic-influenced cultures are rabidly anti-sex, either. Brazil, until I heard this story, was a classic example itself. There has obviously always been a tension in Christianity between the body-positive and the body-denying, and Catholicism has been a home to both. But both strains are very much still influential, and still present.

quote:

---

It is eminently possible to be a Catholic, justice-loving, sex-positive, and REASONABLE! In fact, it happens all the time!

---

Catholicism isn't a democracy, Magoo. Catholics don't get to vote on what the Pope proclaims, and not all Catholics agree with other Catholics on what really makes one a good Catholic or not (...in fact, on a lot of the issues regarding sexuality, Catholics roll their eyes at each other).

quote:

---

Catholics don't get to vote on what the Pope proclaims

---

Sure they do. As you yourself say, they can vote with their feet. Those who disagree with the Pope don't have to stay Catholic. Those who stay, presumably, want to.

Like, if I joined this new group called "Heritage Front", and then found out that they're a bunch of racists, I'd leave. I wouldn't say "Oh, I'm a Heritage Front member, and proud of it, but I'm trying to reform them from within". If I agreed, I'd stay. Otherwise, wouldn't I go find a group whose beliefs actually match mine?

Anyway, I'm just kicking the anthill. I know we've all discussed this before, but it was so much fun, y'know?

[ 30 July 2004: Message edited by: Mr. Magoo ]

If 90% of Catholics don't agree with the Pope on social and family issues (e.g. abortion, divorce, sex, etc.), then why are a member of that religion? A religion with a firm hierarchy, run by a bunch of old men who make rules about those issues that everyone supposedly disagrees with.

[ 30 July 2004: Message edited by: Michelle ]

quote:

---

It is eminently possible to be a Catholic, justice-loving, sex-positive, and REASONABLE! In fact, it happens all the time!

---

And this, too, has been said before: the correct analogy for many of us is not with a membership-based group (like the Heritage Front), it's with identity groups (like queer people). After all, if you can be a Jewish atheist, why not a progressive Catholic? Faith is not a one-way conveyor belt, carrying orders to a disciplined revolutionary cadre from the Papist overlord. It encompasses multiple understandings. A lot of peeople pay no attention to that Pope behind the curtain, when it comes to his twisted obsession with other people's sex lives. That obsession doesn't invalidate everything else within the quite nrich Catholic tradition or the lived faith of millions of people, though.

Hey, this IS fun. Whee!

quote:

---

Faith is not a one-way conveyor belt, carrying orders to a disciplined revolutionary cadre from the Papist overlord.

---

It's not? So my old Orange grandma was fulla shit?

quote:

---

Originally posted by Michelle:
If 90% of Catholics don't agree with the Pope on social and family issues (e.g. abortion, divorce, sex, etc.), then why are a member of that religion?

---

I believe that at one of the older British universities, one can ask for a pint of ale when writing an exam, and one can be arrested for being properly dressed by not wearing sword.

There are these things called "blue laws" -- on the books, but most people don't pay them heed. They are pretty hard to enforce given a general level of uncooperation from the community.

No, the church is not a democracy, but I don't go to church just for politics, either. It's part of the culture I grew up with, and I'm fond of it. The rituals and the spiritual aspects are things I couldn't love without. (The Eucharist for example.) I do choose to be there as an adult, because I have come to the beliefs through a critical process, and I know they are livable for me. In that way it's not exactly the same as an identity group. I'm not there just because I looked at the creed like a checkist and ticked off all the little boxes. Faith is a little more dynamic, and perplexing, than that.

But there is a way that my Catholicism and my NDP membership are similiar. It's that they're human organizations, run by humans, who very often make mistakes. I find a lot of human mistakes forgivable. I like being part of community groups.

quote:

---

Originally posted by swallow:
(By the way, people aren't voting with their feet to leave my church, it's usually packed. It's most packed for the healing mass for people living with AIDS, and it hosts a monthly mass for lesbian & gay Catholics too.)

---

quote:

---

The rituals and the spiritual aspects are things I couldn't love without. (The Eucharist for example.)

---

Speaking of sex-positive Catholics, I didn't realise it was some sort of aphrodisiac or "marital aid".

Think how erotically focussed a religious ritual is, when you're supposed to believe you're taking the body of Christ into your MOUTH!

E*u*c*h*a*r*i*s*t, direct by mail!

Make her scream for more! Direct from the warehouse!

H*O*L*Y* H*O*S*T, 15mg and 30mg

quote:

---

Originally posted by Michelle:
Well then obviously I wasn't talking about your church, then, was I? I was careful to include only those who back up the kind of bigotry spouted by these dorks in the Vatican. Obviously if your church is holding a monthly mass for lesbian and gay Catholics, then they're publicly speaking out against bigotry, aren't they?

---