| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Sound of Trumpet" |
| Date: |
15 May 2006 07:58:50 PM |
| Object: |
Da Vinci Code Is Dangerous |
http://www.christianitytoday.com/movies/commentaries/othercott.html
Let's "Othercott" Da Vinci
Many Christians see The Da Vinci Code as an opportunity for evangelism;
others say it's a chance to engage the culture. Rubbish. Da Vinci is
dangerous, so I'd like to suggest a better alternative.
By Barbara Nicolosi | posted 05/03/06
I've read and heard a lot lately from Christians who suggest that we
should be willing to "engage" The Da Vinci Code, so that we can be a
part of the "cultural conversation." Believers are touting the upcoming
movie as an "opportunity for evangelism" and even an incentive to
bolster our own faith.
Baloney.
This film is based on a book that wears its heresy and blasphemy as a
badge of honor, and I intend to stay far away from it.
I get lots of calls to do interviews about The Da Vinci Code, but I
duck as many of them as I can. Basically, I hate talking about DVC
because I have a personal relationship with Jesus-and he isn't a
proto-feminist goddess-cultic with a weak personality that could have
been simply co-opted by power-hungry misogynists.
I love Jesus. It makes me physically sick to entertain discussion about
the ways in which the defining acts of his life-his Passion,
Resurrection and establishment of the Church-could be a diabolical
scam that he never anticipated nor experienced. It would make me sick
to hear salacious lies about anyone I love; how much more my Savior?
Besides that, I don't think we should encourage people in the terrible
sin against the Holy Spirit of speculating that things that are holy
are evil, and that things that are evil are holy. Isn't that what is
going on here? How is that not painful for anyone who knows the Lord?
Don't debate the Devil
DVC as great opportunity for evangelism? Hmmm. The climate of
evangelism is not consistent with a posture of defiance and cynicism.
Is slander an opportunity? Is angry superiority an opportunity? DVC
represents all the "opportunity" that the Roman persecutions offered
the early Church. Rah.
And here's another thing that troubles me about the "opportunity for
dialogue" stance. The debate is all on hell's terms. I am somebody who
reads about exorcisms. I don't know why. I just do. And one of the
first rules of exorcism is that you never answer the Devil's questions.
You don't debate the Devil. You do not give evil the authority to
question God.
DVC represents a debate in which the questions start with Satan's
presumptions. I find it beyond naive to convince myself that the folks
who are lapping up DVC are on a "search for truth." They're not. They
are on a crusade to validate their own rejection of the authority of
Christ and the Church.
Here's a typical DVC-inspired dialogue. See if you can find a search
for truth in it.
It usually starts with something like this: "Everybody knows that the
Church Fathers were liars. Can you prove the compilation of the Bible
wasn't pure politics?"
And just when you start saying, "Well, I don't agree that the Church
Fathers were--", the questioner moves on with eyes flashing
unnaturally, "Why is the Church so afraid of women, huh? Why has it
suppressed them since the beginning? Answer THAT!"
You clear your throat and say, "Well, I wouldn't say that the Church is
afr--"
But they've moved on: "The fact is, there is no evidence for the
Resurrection. Have you ever read the Gospel of Mary Magdalene?"
"Well, no, but--"
"See you people are all brain-washed." [Exhalation of disgust.] "How so
many people could be so stupid is amazing to me."
When you debate with Satan, there is no opportunity for anything but
people digging their heels into the sludge of chaos and confusion.
Scandalizing the sheep
I also hate the idea that some of the sheep would be scandalized away
from Jesus by this idiotic story. And they will.
The sheep have been bred as teeming little narcissist lambs who
stubbornly consider themselves "special," no matter how mediocre their
understanding and living out of their life of discipleship. We have a
global pasture full of sheep pasturing themselves, with coats
shamefully besmirched by loving their sins.
They bleat defiance and pride of their filth, and insist that Jesus is
indifferent to their degradation and shame: "Who knows, Jesus is
probably just like us!" They don't know, and don't know that they don't
know, or don't know, and don't care that they don't know.
And now The Da Vinci Code comes along to sheepish ears that are primed
and ready to be told that holiness is impossible. And that is why this
book is a success. It says to people, "If Jesus was a sham, then
anything is permissible." (Ref. "You shall be like gods!")
I thought of this when I read a recent DVC rant from Mark Shea, who
wrote that "the most maddening thing about this book is the thought of
somebody losing their faith over this-this!-stupid piece of
dimestore erudition. If you are going to risk your eternal soul, it
should at least be over something noble and romantic and big. If you
are bound to damn yourself, then at least let it be over a torrid and
star-crossed love affair, or out of tragic hubris that sought to know
What Man Was Not Meant to Know .... But to lose your soul over this
cartoonish, illiterate, dishonest piece of hack drivel?"
I recently attended a DVC event at a local evangelical church. Several
panelists gave long speeches about how Christians should welcome DVC as
an opportunity for dialogue, then opened the floor for questions. A
woman began her question by saying, "I don't have any problem with the
fact that Jesus had sex ...."
Unbelievable! Yeah, let's all march our troops into "dialogue." The
fact that our troops are completely disarmed for a fight seems to be
irrelevant!
Many of our Christian sheep will be ripe for slaughter from DVC. All
they will have to go to battle with is the Bible. But DVC undermines
biblical authority by saying that the Bible was the product of a purely
political process. This debate will shake the faith of many who are not
prepared for it.
An alternative "boycott"
So, what can we as Christians do in response to the release of this
movie?
Some are suggesting a protest. But the problem with this option is that
it doesn't work. Any publicity is good publicity. Protests not only
fuel the box office, they make all Christians look like idiots. And
protests and boycotts do nothing to help shape the decisions being made
right now about what movies Hollywood will make in the next few years.
(Or they convince Hollywood to make *more* movies that will provoke
Christians to protest, which will drive the box office up.)
Some suggest that we simply ignore the movie. But the problem with this
option is that the box office is a ballot box. The only people whose
votes are counted are those who buy tickets; if you stay home, you have
thrown your vote away, and you do nothing to shape the Hollywood
decision-making process regarding what movies will make it to the big
screen.
Some suggest that we go see the movie so we can be better prepared to
discuss it, to "engage the culture," so to speak. But if you've read
this far, you already know how I feel about this. The problem with this
option: No one's listening. They think they know what we're going to
say already.
But I'd like to offer another option.
On DVC's opening weekend-May 19-21-you should go to the movies.
Just go to another movie. That's your way of casting your vote, the
only vote Hollywood recognizes: The power of cold hard cash laid down
on a box office window on opening weekend.
Use your vote. Don't throw it away. Vote for a movie other than DVC. If
enough people do it, the powers that be will notice.
The major studio movie scheduled for release against DVC is the
DreamWorks animated feature Over the Hedge. The trailers look fun, and
you can take your kids. And your friends. And their friends. In fact,
let's all go see it.
Let's rock the box office in a way no one expects-without protests,
without boycotts, without arguments, without rancor. Let's show up at
the box office ballot box and cast our votes. And buy some popcorn,
too.
As for The Da Vinci Code, don't go see this stupid movie. Don't pay
money to have the insidious lies of the enemy introduced into your
heart and mind.
Let's "othercott" DVC on May 19 by going to see Over the Hedge instead.
This commentary was adapted by permission from Nicolosi's online blog,
Church of the Masses.
Barbara Nicolosi is the founder and director of Act One, an
organization whose mission is to train committed Christian writers to
work in the Hollywood film industry.
.
|
|
| User: "•R L Measures" |
|
| Title: Re: Da Vinci Code Is Dangerous |
26 May 2006 09:17:13 AM |
|
|
In article <9u4d7290tfeh34c1cscvq4dqg69mcrvqmr@4ax.com>, DCI
<never@comcast.net> wrote:
On Thu, 25 May 2006 22:30:28 -0700, johac <jhachmann@sbcglobal.com>
wrote:
True. As with the "Last Temptation of Christ" some years back all of the
fuss that they raised just piqued people's curiosity so more went to see
it.
It's called marketing.
indeed, and it was free, thanks to the RCC.
.
|
|
|
| User: "johac" |
|
| Title: Re: Da Vinci Code Is Dangerous |
27 May 2006 12:39:16 AM |
|
|
In article <r-2605060717130001@192.168.1.100>,
(•R L Measures) wrote:
In article <9u4d7290tfeh34c1cscvq4dqg69mcrvqmr@4ax.com>, DCI
<never@comcast.net> wrote:
On Thu, 25 May 2006 22:30:28 -0700, johac <jhachmann@sbcglobal.com>
wrote:
True. As with the "Last Temptation of Christ" some years back all of the
fuss that they raised just piqued people's curiosity so more went to see
it.
It's called marketing.
indeed, and it was free, thanks to the RCC.
It wouldn't surprise me though if they demanded a cut.
--
John Hachmann aa #1782
"Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities"
-Voltaire
Contact - Throw a .net over the .com
.
|
|
|
| User: "•R L Measures" |
|
| Title: Re: Da Vinci Code Is Dangerous |
27 May 2006 06:15:38 AM |
|
|
In article <jhachmann-632DF8.22391626052006@news.giganews.com>, johac
<jhachmann@sbcglobal.com> wrote:
In article <r-2605060717130001@192.168.1.100>,
r@somis.org (•R L Measures) wrote:
In article <9u4d7290tfeh34c1cscvq4dqg69mcrvqmr@4ax.com>, DCI
<never@comcast.net> wrote:
On Thu, 25 May 2006 22:30:28 -0700, johac <jhachmann@sbcglobal.com>
wrote:
True. As with the "Last Temptation of Christ" some years back all of the
fuss that they raised just piqued people's curiosity so more went to see
it.
It's called marketing.
indeed, and it was free, thanks to the RCC.
It wouldn't surprise me though if they demanded a cut.
• The money could be put to good use paying off altar-boys.
.
|
|
|
| User: "johac" |
|
| Title: Re: Da Vinci Code Is Dangerous |
28 May 2006 11:24:48 PM |
|
|
In article <r-2705060415380001@192.168.1.100>,
(•R L Measures) wrote:
In article <jhachmann-632DF8.22391626052006@news.giganews.com>, johac
<jhachmann@sbcglobal.com> wrote:
In article <r-2605060717130001@192.168.1.100>,
(•R L Measures) wrote:
In article <9u4d7290tfeh34c1cscvq4dqg69mcrvqmr@4ax.com>, DCI
<never@comcast.net> wrote:
On Thu, 25 May 2006 22:30:28 -0700, johac <jhachmann@sbcglobal.com>
wrote:
True. As with the "Last Temptation of Christ" some years back all of
the
fuss that they raised just piqued people's curiosity so more went to
see
it.
It's called marketing.
indeed, and it was free, thanks to the RCC.
It wouldn't surprise me though if they demanded a cut.
• The money could be put to good use paying off altar-boys.
Almost every week we read about another diocese going bankrupt. I
believe last week it was Spokane.
--
John Hachmann aa #1782
"Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities"
-Voltaire
Contact - Throw a .net over the .com
.
|
|
|
| User: "•R L Measures" |
|
| Title: Re: Da Vinci Code Is Dangerous |
29 May 2006 05:42:48 AM |
|
|
In article <jhachmann-F17B2B.21244828052006@news.giganews.com>, johac
<jhachmann@sbcglobal.com> wrote:
In article <r-2705060415380001@192.168.1.100>,
r@somis.org (•R L Measures) wrote:
In article <jhachmann-632DF8.22391626052006@news.giganews.com>, johac
<jhachmann@sbcglobal.com> wrote:
In article <r-2605060717130001@192.168.1.100>,
r@somis.org (•R L Measures) wrote:
In article <9u4d7290tfeh34c1cscvq4dqg69mcrvqmr@4ax.com>, DCI
<never@comcast.net> wrote:
On Thu, 25 May 2006 22:30:28 -0700, johac <jhachmann@sbcglobal.com>
wrote:
True. As with the "Last Temptation of Christ" some years back all of
the
fuss that they raised just piqued people's curiosity so more went to
see
it.
It's called marketing.
indeed, and it was free, thanks to the RCC.
It wouldn't surprise me though if they demanded a cut.
• The money could be put to good use paying off altar-boys.
Almost every week we read about another diocese going bankrupt. I
believe last week it was Spokane.
• Indeed. The amazing thing is that John-Paul II did not try to put a
stop to priests buttramming boys when he had the chance 20-years before
the feces hit the fan in 2002.
.
|
|
|
| User: "johac" |
|
| Title: Re: Da Vinci Code Is Dangerous |
29 May 2006 11:54:09 PM |
|
|
In article <r-2905060342480001@192.168.1.100>,
(•R L Measures) wrote:
In article <jhachmann-F17B2B.21244828052006@news.giganews.com>, johac
<jhachmann@sbcglobal.com> wrote:
In article <r-2705060415380001@192.168.1.100>,
(•R L Measures) wrote:
In article <jhachmann-632DF8.22391626052006@news.giganews.com>, johac
<jhachmann@sbcglobal.com> wrote:
In article <r-2605060717130001@192.168.1.100>,
(•R L Measures) wrote:
In article <9u4d7290tfeh34c1cscvq4dqg69mcrvqmr@4ax.com>, DCI
<never@comcast.net> wrote:
On Thu, 25 May 2006 22:30:28 -0700, johac <jhachmann@sbcglobal.com>
wrote:
True. As with the "Last Temptation of Christ" some years back all
of
the
fuss that they raised just piqued people's curiosity so more went
to
see
it.
It's called marketing.
indeed, and it was free, thanks to the RCC.
It wouldn't surprise me though if they demanded a cut.
• The money could be put to good use paying off altar-boys.
Almost every week we read about another diocese going bankrupt. I
believe last week it was Spokane.
• Indeed. The amazing thing is that John-Paul II did not try to put a
stop to priests buttramming boys when he had the chance 20-years before
the feces hit the fan in 2002.
It appears that it was going on long before that. Pope John XXIII was
supposed to be the great reformer, but I don't recall much happening
when he was in charge. The popes after him didn't do much either until
the bad publicity became too much even for jp2 to ignore.
--
John Hachmann aa #1782
"Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities"
-Voltaire
Contact - Throw a .net over the .com
.
|
|
|
| User: "•R L Measures" |
|
| Title: Re: Da Vinci Code Is Dangerous |
30 May 2006 06:57:18 AM |
|
|
In article <jhachmann-1B1D05.21540929052006@news.giganews.com>, johac
<jhachmann@sbcglobal.com> wrote:
In article <r-2905060342480001@192.168.1.100>,
r@somis.org (•R L Measures) wrote:
In article <jhachmann-F17B2B.21244828052006@news.giganews.com>, johac
<jhachmann@sbcglobal.com> wrote:
In article <r-2705060415380001@192.168.1.100>,
r@somis.org (•R L Measures) wrote:
In article <jhachmann-632DF8.22391626052006@news.giganews.com>, johac
<jhachmann@sbcglobal.com> wrote:
In article <r-2605060717130001@192.168.1.100>,
r@somis.org (•R L Measures) wrote:
In article <9u4d7290tfeh34c1cscvq4dqg69mcrvqmr@4ax.com>, DCI
<never@comcast.net> wrote:
On Thu, 25 May 2006 22:30:28 -0700, johac
<jhachmann@sbcglobal.com>
wrote:
True. As with the "Last Temptation of Christ" some years
back all
of
the
fuss that they raised just piqued people's curiosity so
more went
to
see
it.
It's called marketing.
indeed, and it was free, thanks to the RCC.
It wouldn't surprise me though if they demanded a cut.
• The money could be put to good use paying off altar-boys.
Almost every week we read about another diocese going bankrupt. I
believe last week it was Spokane.
• Indeed. The amazing thing is that John-Paul II did not try to put a
stop to priests buttramming boys when he had the chance 20-years before
the feces hit the fan in 2002.
It appears that it was going on long before that.
• Indeed. It is now known that it was going on in the 1930s. Shortly
after the one true church changed the rules in the 12th century and made
the vow of celibacy mandatory, Peter Comestor made the following comment:
"The devil never harmed the church so much as when the church herself
adopted the vow of celibacy."
- - Peter Comestor
• Upon reading this in the 20th century, I was unsure of what Pete was
getting at, but when the altar-boy scandal hit the fan in 2002, I got a
pretty damned good clue.
Pope John XXIII was
supposed to be the great reformer, but I don't recall much happening
when he was in charge. The popes after him didn't do much either until
the bad publicity became too much even for jp2 to ignore.
• The first case that recieved national press coverage was the Fr.
Gilbert Gauthe, Jr. case in Vermillion Parrish, LA in 1985. This should
have been a wake up call for John-Paul, but he did virtually nothing at
all. Maybe he was just too old and too worn out?
I find it somewhat curious that 19-yr old Karol Wojtyla, Jr. was serving
as an altar-boy in Poland when the Nazis invaded Poland in Sept., 1939.
.
|
|
|
| User: "johac" |
|
| Title: Re: Da Vinci Code Is Dangerous |
30 May 2006 11:51:33 PM |
|
|
In article <r-3005060457180001@192.168.1.100>,
(•R L Measures) wrote:
In article <jhachmann-1B1D05.21540929052006@news.giganews.com>, johac
<jhachmann@sbcglobal.com> wrote:
In article <r-2905060342480001@192.168.1.100>,
(•R L Measures) wrote:
In article <jhachmann-F17B2B.21244828052006@news.giganews.com>, johac
<jhachmann@sbcglobal.com> wrote:
In article <r-2705060415380001@192.168.1.100>,
(•R L Measures) wrote:
In article <jhachmann-632DF8.22391626052006@news.giganews.com>, johac
<jhachmann@sbcglobal.com> wrote:
In article <r-2605060717130001@192.168.1.100>,
(•R L Measures) wrote:
In article <9u4d7290tfeh34c1cscvq4dqg69mcrvqmr@4ax.com>, DCI
<never@comcast.net> wrote:
On Thu, 25 May 2006 22:30:28 -0700, johac
<jhachmann@sbcglobal.com>
wrote:
True. As with the "Last Temptation of Christ" some years
back all
of
the
fuss that they raised just piqued people's curiosity so
more went
to
see
it.
It's called marketing.
indeed, and it was free, thanks to the RCC.
It wouldn't surprise me though if they demanded a cut.
• The money could be put to good use paying off altar-boys.
Almost every week we read about another diocese going bankrupt. I
believe last week it was Spokane.
• Indeed. The amazing thing is that John-Paul II did not try to put a
stop to priests buttramming boys when he had the chance 20-years before
the feces hit the fan in 2002.
It appears that it was going on long before that.
• Indeed. It is now known that it was going on in the 1930s. Shortly
after the one true church changed the rules in the 12th century and made
the vow of celibacy mandatory, Peter Comestor made the following comment:
"The devil never harmed the church so much as when the church herself
adopted the vow of celibacy."
- - Peter Comestor
• Upon reading this in the 20th century, I was unsure of what Pete was
getting at, but when the altar-boy scandal hit the fan in 2002, I got a
pretty damned good clue.
The medieval literature is full of accounts of priests behaving badly.
I'm sure that it was going on even before that.
Pope John XXIII was
supposed to be the great reformer, but I don't recall much happening
when he was in charge. The popes after him didn't do much either until
the bad publicity became too much even for jp2 to ignore.
• The first case that recieved national press coverage was the Fr.
Gilbert Gauthe, Jr. case in Vermillion Parrish, LA in 1985. This should
have been a wake up call for John-Paul, but he did virtually nothing at
all. Maybe he was just too old and too worn out?
I find it somewhat curious that 19-yr old Karol Wojtyla, Jr. was serving
as an altar-boy in Poland when the Nazis invaded Poland in Sept., 1939.
Yes. Who knows? Many if the abuses took place long before 1985, but it
seemed to be the policy of the church then to sweep such matters under
the rug.
--
John Hachmann aa #1782
"Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities"
-Voltaire
Contact - Throw a .net over the .com
.
|
|
|
| User: "•R L Measures" |
|
| Title: Re: Da Vinci Code Is Dangerous |
31 May 2006 04:58:51 AM |
|
|
In article <jhachmann-65A48D.21513330052006@news.giganews.com>, johac
<jhachmann@sbcglobal.com> wrote:
In article <r-3005060457180001@192.168.1.100>,
r@somis.org (•R L Measures) wrote:
In article <jhachmann-1B1D05.21540929052006@news.giganews.com>, johac
<jhachmann@sbcglobal.com> wrote:
In article <r-2905060342480001@192.168.1.100>,
r@somis.org (•R L Measures) wrote:
In article <jhachmann-F17B2B.21244828052006@news.giganews.com>, johac
<jhachmann@sbcglobal.com> wrote:
In article <r-2705060415380001@192.168.1.100>,
r@somis.org (•R L Measures) wrote:
In article
<jhachmann-632DF8.22391626052006@news.giganews.com>, johac
<jhachmann@sbcglobal.com> wrote:
In article <r-2605060717130001@192.168.1.100>,
r@somis.org (•R L Measures) wrote:
In article <9u4d7290tfeh34c1cscvq4dqg69mcrvqmr@4ax.com>, DCI
<never@comcast.net> wrote:
On Thu, 25 May 2006 22:30:28 -0700, johac
<jhachmann@sbcglobal.com>
wrote:
True. As with the "Last Temptation of Christ" some years
back all
of
the
fuss that they raised just piqued people's curiosity so
more went
to
see
it.
It's called marketing.
indeed, and it was free, thanks to the RCC.
It wouldn't surprise me though if they demanded a cut.
• The money could be put to good use paying off altar-boys.
Almost every week we read about another diocese going bankrupt. I
believe last week it was Spokane.
• Indeed. The amazing thing is that John-Paul II did not try to put a
stop to priests buttramming boys when he had the chance 20-years before
the feces hit the fan in 2002.
It appears that it was going on long before that.
• Indeed. It is now known that it was going on in the 1930s. Shortly
after the one true church changed the rules in the 12th century and made
the vow of celibacy mandatory, Peter Comestor made the following comment:
"The devil never harmed the church so much as when the church herself
adopted the vow of celibacy."
- - Peter Comestor
• Upon reading this in the 20th century, I was unsure of what Pete was
getting at, but when the altar-boy scandal hit the fan in 2002, I got a
pretty damned good clue.
The medieval literature is full of accounts of priests behaving badly.
I'm sure that it was going on even before that.
• Agreed, but after the vow of not to have sex with women became
mandatory, those who sought to behave badly with females tended to move
on, leaving those who were interested in the other sex. After 9-centuries,
this was bound to affect management.
Pope John XXIII was
supposed to be the great reformer, but I don't recall much happening
when he was in charge. The popes after him didn't do much either until
the bad publicity became too much even for jp2 to ignore.
• The first case that recieved national press coverage was the Fr.
Gilbert Gauthe, Jr. case in Vermillion Parrish, LA in 1985. This should
have been a wake up call for John-Paul, but he did virtually nothing at
all. Maybe he was just too old and too worn out?
I find it somewhat curious that 19-yr old Karol Wojtyla, Jr. was serving
as an altar-boy in Poland when the Nazis invaded Poland in Sept., 1939.
Yes. Who knows? Many if the abuses took place long before 1985, but it
seemed to be the policy of the church then to sweep such matters under
the rug.
• As I see it, having a supposedly infallible leader is not conducive to
fixing fallibilities in the org. Also, from a sin-level consideration,
exramarital impregnation would seem to be more serious than a priest
humping altar-boys.
cheers
.
|
|
|
| User: "johac" |
|
| Title: Re: Da Vinci Code Is Dangerous |
31 May 2006 11:47:26 PM |
|
|
In article <r-3105060258510001@192.168.1.100>,
(•R L Measures) wrote:
In article <jhachmann-65A48D.21513330052006@news.giganews.com>, johac
<jhachmann@sbcglobal.com> wrote:
In article <r-3005060457180001@192.168.1.100>,
(•R L Measures) wrote:
In article <jhachmann-1B1D05.21540929052006@news.giganews.com>, johac
<jhachmann@sbcglobal.com> wrote:
In article <r-2905060342480001@192.168.1.100>,
(•R L Measures) wrote:
In article <jhachmann-F17B2B.21244828052006@news.giganews.com>, johac
<jhachmann@sbcglobal.com> wrote:
In article <r-2705060415380001@192.168.1.100>,
(•R L Measures) wrote:
In article
<jhachmann-632DF8.22391626052006@news.giganews.com>, johac
<jhachmann@sbcglobal.com> wrote:
In article <r-2605060717130001@192.168.1.100>,
(•R L Measures) wrote:
In article <9u4d7290tfeh34c1cscvq4dqg69mcrvqmr@4ax.com>, DCI
<never@comcast.net> wrote:
On Thu, 25 May 2006 22:30:28 -0700, johac
<jhachmann@sbcglobal.com>
wrote:
True. As with the "Last Temptation of Christ" some years
back all
of
the
fuss that they raised just piqued people's curiosity so
more went
to
see
it.
It's called marketing.
indeed, and it was free, thanks to the RCC.
It wouldn't surprise me though if they demanded a cut.
• The money could be put to good use paying off altar-boys.
Almost every week we read about another diocese going bankrupt. I
believe last week it was Spokane.
• Indeed. The amazing thing is that John-Paul II did not try to put
a
stop to priests buttramming boys when he had the chance 20-years
before
the feces hit the fan in 2002.
It appears that it was going on long before that.
• Indeed. It is now known that it was going on in the 1930s. Shortly
after the one true church changed the rules in the 12th century and made
the vow of celibacy mandatory, Peter Comestor made the following comment:
"The devil never harmed the church so much as when the church herself
adopted the vow of celibacy."
- - Peter Comestor
• Upon reading this in the 20th century, I was unsure of what Pete was
getting at, but when the altar-boy scandal hit the fan in 2002, I got a
pretty damned good clue.
The medieval literature is full of accounts of priests behaving badly.
I'm sure that it was going on even before that.
• Agreed, but after the vow of not to have sex with women became
mandatory, those who sought to behave badly with females tended to move
on, leaving those who were interested in the other sex. After 9-centuries,
this was bound to affect management.
Both probably went on since the beginnings of the church. At times one
may have predominated over the other. At present, most of the crimes
seem to be against young boys, but just today I read of a priest in
Ireland raping a teenaged girl. I'll post that somewhere else.
Pope John XXIII was
supposed to be the great reformer, but I don't recall much happening
when he was in charge. The popes after him didn't do much either until
the bad publicity became too much even for jp2 to ignore.
• The first case that recieved national press coverage was the Fr.
Gilbert Gauthe, Jr. case in Vermillion Parrish, LA in 1985. This should
have been a wake up call for John-Paul, but he did virtually nothing at
all. Maybe he was just too old and too worn out?
I find it somewhat curious that 19-yr old Karol Wojtyla, Jr. was
serving
as an altar-boy in Poland when the Nazis invaded Poland in Sept., 1939.
Yes. Who knows? Many if the abuses took place long before 1985, but it
seemed to be the policy of the church then to sweep such matters under
the rug.
• As I see it, having a supposedly infallible leader is not conducive to
fixing fallibilities in the org. Also, from a sin-level consideration,
exramarital impregnation would seem to be more serious than a priest
humping altar-boys.
Leave no 'evidence'?
cheers
--
John Hachmann aa #1782
"Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities"
-Voltaire
Contact - Throw a .net over the .com
.
|
|
|
| User: "•R L Measures" |
|
| Title: Re: Da Vinci Code Is Dangerous |
01 Jun 2006 04:46:51 AM |
|
|
In article <jhachmann-0CF138.21472631052006@news.giganews.com>, johac
<jhachmann@sbcglobal.com> wrote:
In article <r-3105060258510001@192.168.1.100>,
r@somis.org (•R L Measures) wrote:
In article <jhachmann-65A48D.21513330052006@news.giganews.com>, johac
<jhachmann@sbcglobal.com> wrote:
...
"The devil never harmed the church so much as when the church herself
adopted the vow of celibacy."
- - Peter Comestor
• Upon reading this in the 20th century, I was unsure of what Pete was
getting at, but when the altar-boy scandal hit the fan in 2002, I got a
pretty damned good clue.
The medieval literature is full of accounts of priests behaving badly.
I'm sure that it was going on even before that.
• Agreed, but after the vow of not to have sex with women became
mandatory, those who sought to behave badly with females tended to move
on, leaving those who were interested in the other sex. After 9-centuries,
this was bound to affect management.
Both probably went on since the beginnings of the church. At times one
may have predominated over the other. At present, most of the crimes
seem to be against young boys, but just today I read of a priest in
Ireland raping a teenaged girl. I'll post that somewhere else.
• I have observed that around 1 in 10 cases in Southern California
involve females. I also have heard of teenage females who went after
priests. My guess is that priests were seen as less likely to talk and
less likely to be carriers of genital herpes, HPV, and all the other *****
that is going around these days.
....
Yes. Who knows? Many if the abuses took place long before 1985, but it
seemed to be the policy of the church then to sweep such matters under
the rug.
• As I see it, having a supposedly infallible leader is not conducive to
fixing fallibilities in the org. Also, from a sin-level consideration,
exramarital impregnation would seem to be more serious than a priest
humping altar-boys.
Leave no 'evidence'?
• Good point. Unwanted pregnancy will always be a problem with Catholics
as long as the dividing line between Hell and Blessed Salvation is made of
rubber. Presently, three Catholic friends aged 19, 20, and 25 are
pregnant, and another one delivered a baby girl this Monday, which she put
up for adoption, which was not an easy thing to do. The bad news is that
two of them are going to have boys that some priest could damn well be
checking out during baptism as a future altar-boy / sex-toy. I think
I'm gonna puke.
cheers
.
|
|
|
| User: "johac" |
|
| Title: Re: Da Vinci Code Is Dangerous |
01 Jun 2006 11:50:06 PM |
|
|
In article <r-0106060246510001@192.168.1.100>,
(•R L Measures) wrote:
In article <jhachmann-0CF138.21472631052006@news.giganews.com>, johac
<jhachmann@sbcglobal.com> wrote:
In article <r-3105060258510001@192.168.1.100>,
(•R L Measures) wrote:
In article <jhachmann-65A48D.21513330052006@news.giganews.com>, johac
<jhachmann@sbcglobal.com> wrote:
...
"The devil never harmed the church so much as when the church herself
adopted the vow of celibacy."
- - Peter Comestor
• Upon reading this in the 20th century, I was unsure of what Pete
was
getting at, but when the altar-boy scandal hit the fan in 2002, I got
a
pretty damned good clue.
The medieval literature is full of accounts of priests behaving badly.
I'm sure that it was going on even before that.
• Agreed, but after the vow of not to have sex with women became
mandatory, those who sought to behave badly with females tended to move
on, leaving those who were interested in the other sex. After
9-centuries,
this was bound to affect management.
Both probably went on since the beginnings of the church. At times one
may have predominated over the other. At present, most of the crimes
seem to be against young boys, but just today I read of a priest in
Ireland raping a teenaged girl. I'll post that somewhere else.
• I have observed that around 1 in 10 cases in Southern California
involve females. I also have heard of teenage females who went after
priests. My guess is that priests were seen as less likely to talk and
less likely to be carriers of genital herpes, HPV, and all the other *****
that is going around these days.
Could be. It also might be that some girls my see the priests as
'father' figures (no pun intended).
....
Yes. Who knows? Many if the abuses took place long before 1985, but it
seemed to be the policy of the church then to sweep such matters under
the rug.
• As I see it, having a supposedly infallible leader is not conducive to
fixing fallibilities in the org. Also, from a sin-level consideration,
exramarital impregnation would seem to be more serious than a priest
humping altar-boys.
Leave no 'evidence'?
• Good point. Unwanted pregnancy will always be a problem with Catholics
as long as the dividing line between Hell and Blessed Salvation is made of
rubber. Presently, three Catholic friends aged 19, 20, and 25 are
pregnant, and another one delivered a baby girl this Monday, which she put
up for adoption, which was not an easy thing to do. The bad news is that
two of them are going to have boys that some priest could damn well be
checking out during baptism as a future altar-boy / sex-toy. I think
I'm gonna puke.
If I had a young kid, there's no way I'd let him near a priest, let
alone be an altar boy. There is just too much of that going on. I'm
disgusted too.
cheers
--
John Hachmann aa #1782
"Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities"
-Voltaire
Contact - Throw a .net over the .com
.
|
|
|
| User: "•R L Measures" |
|
| Title: Re: Da Vinci Code Is Dangerous |
02 Jun 2006 06:53:06 AM |
|
|
In article <jhachmann-07F8A3.21500601062006@news.giganews.com>, johac
<jhachmann@sbcglobal.com> wrote:
In article <r-0106060246510001@192.168.1.100>,
r@somis.org (•R L Measures) wrote:
In article <jhachmann-0CF138.21472631052006@news.giganews.com>, johac
<jhachmann@sbcglobal.com> wrote:
In article <r-3105060258510001@192.168.1.100>,
r@somis.org (•R L Measures) wrote:
In article <jhachmann-65A48D.21513330052006@news.giganews.com>, johac
<jhachmann@sbcglobal.com> wrote:
...
"The devil never harmed the church so much as when the church
herself
adopted the vow of celibacy."
- - Peter Comestor
• Upon reading this in the 20th century, I was unsure of what Pete
was
getting at, but when the altar-boy scandal hit the fan in
2002, I got
a
pretty damned good clue.
The medieval literature is full of accounts of priests behaving
badly.
I'm sure that it was going on even before that.
• Agreed, but after the vow of not to have sex with women became
mandatory, those who sought to behave badly with females tended to move
on, leaving those who were interested in the other sex. After
9-centuries,
this was bound to affect management.
Both probably went on since the beginnings of the church. At times one
may have predominated over the other. At present, most of the crimes
seem to be against young boys, but just today I read of a priest in
Ireland raping a teenaged girl. I'll post that somewhere else.
• I have observed that around 1 in 10 cases in Southern California
involve females. I also have heard of teenage females who went after
priests. My guess is that priests were seen as less likely to talk and
less likely to be carriers of genital herpes, HPV, and all the other *****
that is going around these days.
Could be. It also might be that some girls my see the priests as
'father' figures (no pun intended).
• Damn! Are you suggesting something like what occurred in the case of
Mr. Lot? In her book "Women and Their Fathers", Victoria Secunda states
that there are daughters who practice seduction by going after their
fathers.
....
Yes. Who knows? Many if the abuses took place long before 1985,
but it
seemed to be the policy of the church then to sweep such matters
under
the rug.
• As I see it, having a supposedly infallible leader is not
conducive to
fixing fallibilities in the org. Also, from a sin-level consideration,
exramarital impregnation would seem to be more serious than a priest
humping altar-boys.
Leave no 'evidence'?
• Good point. Unwanted pregnancy will always be a problem with Catholics
as long as the dividing line between Hell and Blessed Salvation is made of
rubber. Presently, three Catholic friends aged 19, 20, and 25 are
pregnant, and another one delivered a baby girl this Monday, which she put
up for adoption, which was not an easy thing to do. The bad news is that
two of them are going to have boys that some priest could damn well be
checking out during baptism as a future altar-boy / sex-toy. I think
I'm gonna puke.
If I had a young kid, there's no way I'd let him near a priest, let
alone be an altar boy.
• amen.
There is just too much of that going on. I'm
disgusted too.
• I can not think of any scandal that would be more damaging than boy
butt ramming.
.
|
|
|
| User: "johac" |
|
| Title: Re: Da Vinci Code Is Dangerous |
02 Jun 2006 11:55:49 PM |
|
|
In article <r-0206060453060001@192.168.1.100>,
(•R L Measures) wrote:
In article <jhachmann-07F8A3.21500601062006@news.giganews.com>, johac
<jhachmann@sbcglobal.com> wrote:
In article <r-0106060246510001@192.168.1.100>,
(•R L Measures) wrote:
In article <jhachmann-0CF138.21472631052006@news.giganews.com>, johac
<jhachmann@sbcglobal.com> wrote:
In article <r-3105060258510001@192.168.1.100>,
(•R L Measures) wrote:
In article <jhachmann-65A48D.21513330052006@news.giganews.com>, johac
<jhachmann@sbcglobal.com> wrote:
...
"The devil never harmed the church so much as when the church
herself
adopted the vow of celibacy."
- - Peter Comestor
• Upon reading this in the 20th century, I was unsure of what
Pete
was
getting at, but when the altar-boy scandal hit the fan in
2002, I got
a
pretty damned good clue.
The medieval literature is full of accounts of priests behaving
badly.
I'm sure that it was going on even before that.
• Agreed, but after the vow of not to have sex with women became
mandatory, those who sought to behave badly with females tended to
move
on, leaving those who were interested in the other sex. After
9-centuries,
this was bound to affect management.
Both probably went on since the beginnings of the church. At times one
may have predominated over the other. At present, most of the crimes
seem to be against young boys, but just today I read of a priest in
Ireland raping a teenaged girl. I'll post that somewhere else.
• I have observed that around 1 in 10 cases in Southern California
involve females. I also have heard of teenage females who went after
priests. My guess is that priests were seen as less likely to talk and
less likely to be carriers of genital herpes, HPV, and all the other *****
that is going around these days.
Could be. It also might be that some girls my see the priests as
'father' figures (no pun intended).
• Damn! Are you suggesting something like what occurred in the case of
Mr. Lot? In her book "Women and Their Fathers", Victoria Secunda states
that there are daughters who practice seduction by going after their
fathers.
I didn't read the book, but I think that it's widely believed that many
women and girls are attracted to authority figures. Freud might say that
it's a father surrogate, but it might be more something left over from
evolution where females usually go for the alpha male.
....
Yes. Who knows? Many if the abuses took place long before 1985,
but it
seemed to be the policy of the church then to sweep such matters
under
the rug.
• As I see it, having a supposedly infallible leader is not
conducive to
fixing fallibilities in the org. Also, from a sin-level
consideration,
exramarital impregnation would seem to be more serious than a priest
humping altar-boys.
Leave no 'evidence'?
• Good point. Unwanted pregnancy will always be a problem with
Catholics
as long as the dividing line between Hell and Blessed Salvation is made
of
rubber. Presently, three Catholic friends aged 19, 20, and 25 are
pregnant, and another one delivered a baby girl this Monday, which she
put
up for adoption, which was not an easy thing to do. The bad news is that
two of them are going to have boys that some priest could damn well be
checking out during baptism as a future altar-boy / sex-toy. I think
I'm gonna puke.
If I had a young kid, there's no way I'd let him near a priest, let
alone be an altar boy.
• amen.
There is just too much of that going on. I'm
disgusted too.
• I can not think of any scandal that would be more damaging than boy
butt ramming.
Indeed.
--
John Hachmann aa #1782
"Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities"
-Voltaire
Contact - Throw a .net over the .com
.
|
|
|
| User: "•R L Measures" |
|
| Title: Re: Da Vinci Code Is Dangerous |
03 Jun 2006 06:12:38 AM |
|
|
In article <jhachmann-AE2388.21554902062006@news.giganews.com>, johac
<jhachmann@sbcglobal.com> wrote:
In article <r-0206060453060001@192.168.1.100>,
r@somis.org (•R L Measures) wrote:
In article <jhachmann-07F8A3.21500601062006@news.giganews.com>, johac
<jhachmann@sbcglobal.com> wrote:
In article <r-0106060246510001@192.168.1.100>,
r@somis.org (•R L Measures) wrote:
In article <jhachmann-0CF138.21472631052006@news.giganews.com>, johac
<jhachmann@sbcglobal.com> wrote:
In article <r-3105060258510001@192.168.1.100>,
r@somis.org (•R L Measures) wrote:
In article
<jhachmann-65A48D.21513330052006@news.giganews.com>, johac
<jhachmann@sbcglobal.com> wrote:
...
"The devil never harmed the church so much as when the church
herself
adopted the vow of celibacy."
- - Peter Comestor
...
Could be. It also might be that some girls my see the priests as
'father' figures (no pun intended).
• Damn! Are you suggesting something like what occurred in the case of
Mr. Lot? In her book "Women and Their Fathers", Victoria Secunda states
that there are daughters who practice seduction by going after their
fathers.
I didn't read the book, but I think that it's widely believed that many
women and girls are attracted to authority figures.
• so it seems, and there are undoubtedly those guys who are attracted to
wicked-Wanda types.
Freud might say that
it's a father surrogate, but it might be more something left over from
evolution where females usually go for the alpha male.
• I go with the alpha male.
...
.
|
|
|
| User: "johac" |
|
| Title: Re: Da Vinci Code Is Dangerous |
04 Jun 2006 12:44:48 AM |
|
|
In article <r-0306060412380001@192.168.1.100>,
(•R L Measures) wrote:
In article <jhachmann-AE2388.21554902062006@news.giganews.com>, johac
<jhachmann@sbcglobal.com> wrote:
In article <r-0206060453060001@192.168.1.100>,
(•R L Measures) wrote:
In article <jhachmann-07F8A3.21500601062006@news.giganews.com>, johac
<jhachmann@sbcglobal.com> wrote:
In article <r-0106060246510001@192.168.1.100>,
(•R L Measures) wrote:
In article <jhachmann-0CF138.21472631052006@news.giganews.com>, johac
<jhachmann@sbcglobal.com> wrote:
In article <r-3105060258510001@192.168.1.100>,
(•R L Measures) wrote:
In article
<jhachmann-65A48D.21513330052006@news.giganews.com>, johac
<jhachmann@sbcglobal.com> wrote:
...
"The devil never harmed the church so much as when the church
herself
adopted the vow of celibacy."
- - Peter Comestor
...
Could be. It also might be that some girls my see the priests as
'father' figures (no pun intended).
• Damn! Are you suggesting something like what occurred in the case of
Mr. Lot? In her book "Women and Their Fathers", Victoria Secunda states
that there are daughters who practice seduction by going after their
fathers.
I didn't read the book, but I think that it's widely believed that many
women and girls are attracted to authority figures.
• so it seems, and there are undoubtedly those guys who are attracted to
wicked-Wanda types.
I believe it's true that some men feel a need to be dominated.
Freud might say that
it's a father surrogate, but it might be more something left over from
evolution where females usually go for the alpha male.
• I go with the alpha male.
Good.
...
--
John Hachmann aa #1782
"Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities"
-Voltaire
Contact - Throw a .net over the .com
.
|
|
|
| User: "•R L Measures" |
|
| Title: Re: Da Vinci Code Is Dangerous |
04 Jun 2006 08:13:49 AM |
|
|
In article <jhachmann-A92D55.22444803062006@news.giganews.com>, johac
<jhachmann@sbcglobal.com> wrote:
In article <r-0306060412380001@192.168.1.100>,
r@somis.org (•R L Measures) wrote:
In article <jhachmann-AE2388.21554902062006@news.giganews.com>, johac
<jhachmann@sbcglobal.com> wrote:
In article <r-0206060453060001@192.168.1.100>,
r@somis.org (•R L Measures) wrote:
In article <jhachmann-07F8A3.21500601062006@news.giganews.com>, johac
<jhachmann@sbcglobal.com> wrote:
In article <r-0106060246510001@192.168.1.100>,
r@somis.org (•R L Measures) wrote:
In article
<jhachmann-0CF138.21472631052006@news.giganews.com>, johac
<jhachmann@sbcglobal.com> wrote:
In article <r-3105060258510001@192.168.1.100>,
r@somis.org (•R L Measures) wrote:
In article
<jhachmann-65A48D.21513330052006@news.giganews.com>, johac
<jhachmann@sbcglobal.com> wrote:
...
"The devil never harmed the church so much as when the
church
herself
adopted the vow of celibacy."
- - Peter Comestor
...
Could be. It also might be that some girls my see the priests as
'father' figures (no pun intended).
• Damn! Are you suggesting something like what occurred in the case of
Mr. Lot? In her book "Women and Their Fathers", Victoria Secunda states
that there are daughters who practice seduction by going after their
fathers.
I didn't read the book, but I think that it's widely believed that many
women and girls are attracted to authority figures.
• so it seems, and there are undoubtedly those guys who are attracted to
wicked-Wanda types.
I believe it's true that some men feel a need to be dominated.
• There's a business in Washington D. C. within sight of the Capital Dome
that gets c.$165 for a 40-minute session. The owner said that a goodly
number of her regular customers are congressmen.
Freud might say that
it's a father surrogate, but it might be more something left over from
evolution where females usually go for the alpha male.
• I go with the alpha male.
Good.
...
.
|
|
|
| User: "johac" |
|
| Title: Re: Da Vinci Code Is Dangerous |
04 Jun 2006 11:31:42 PM |
|
|
In article <r-0406060613490001@192.168.1.101>,
(•R L Measures) wrote:
In article <jhachmann-A92D55.22444803062006@news.giganews.com>, johac
<jhachmann@sbcglobal.com> wrote:
In article <r-0306060412380001@192.168.1.100>,
(•R L Measures) wrote:
In article <jhachmann-AE2388.21554902062006@news.giganews.com>, johac
<jhachmann@sbcglobal.com> wrote:
In article <r-0206060453060001@192.168.1.100>,
(•R L Measures) wrote:
In article <jhachmann-07F8A3.21500601062006@news.giganews.com>, johac
<jhachmann@sbcglobal.com> wrote:
In article <r-0106060246510001@192.168.1.100>,
(•R L Measures) wrote:
In article
<jhachmann-0CF138.21472631052006@news.giganews.com>, johac
<jhachmann@sbcglobal.com> wrote:
In article <r-3105060258510001@192.168.1.100>,
(•R L Measures) wrote:
In article
<jhachmann-65A48D.21513330052006@news.giganews.com>, johac
<jhachmann@sbcglobal.com> wrote:
...
"The devil never harmed the church so much as when the
church
herself
adopted the vow of celibacy."
- - Peter Comestor
...
Could be. It also might be that some girls my see the priests as
'father' figures (no pun intended).
• Damn! Are you suggesting something like what occurred in the case
of
Mr. Lot? In her book "Women and Their Fathers", Victoria Secunda
states
that there are daughters who practice seduction by going after their
fathers.
I didn't read the book, but I think that it's widely believed that many
women and girls are attracted to authority figures.
• so it seems, and there are undoubtedly those guys who are attracted to
wicked-Wanda types.
I believe it's true that some men feel a need to be dominated.
• There's a business in Washington D. C. within sight of the Capital Dome
that gets c.$165 for a 40-minute session. The owner said that a goodly
number of her regular customers are congressmen.
Strange, but I don't find that very surprising.
Freud might say that
it's a father surrogate, but it might be more something left over from
evolution where females usually go for the alpha male.
• I go with the alpha male.
Good.
...
--
John Hachmann aa #1782
"Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities"
-Voltaire
Contact - Throw a .net over the .com
.
|
|
|
| User: "•R L Measures" |
|
| Title: Re: Da Vinci Code Is Dangerous |
05 Jun 2006 01:07:27 AM |
|
|
In article <jhachmann-75804E.21314204062006@news.giganews.com>, johac
<jhachmann@sbcglobal.com> wrote:
In article <r-0406060613490001@192.168.1.101>,
r@somis.org (•R L Measures) wrote:
In article <jhachmann-A92D55.22444803062006@news.giganews.com>, johac
<jhachmann@sbcglobal.com> wrote:
In article <r-0306060412380001@192.168.1.100>,
r@somis.org (•R L Measures) wrote:
In article <jhachmann-AE2388.21554902062006@news.giganews.com>, johac
<jhachmann@sbcglobal.com> wrote:
...
Could be. It also might be that some girls my see the priests as
'father' figures (no pun intended).
• Damn! Are you suggesting something like what occurred in
the case
of
Mr. Lot? In her book "Women and Their Fathers", Victoria Secunda
states
that there are daughters who practice seduction by going after their
fathers.
I didn't read the book, but I think that it's widely believed
that many
women and girls are attracted to authority figures.
• so it seems, and there are undoubtedly those guys who are
attracted to
wicked-Wanda types.
I believe it's true that some men feel a need to be dominated.
• There's a business in Washington D. C. within sight of the Capital Dome
that gets c.$165 for a 40-minute session. The owner said that a goodly
number of her regular customers are congressmen.
Strange, but I don't find that very surprising.
• As did I.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "•R L Measures" |
|
| Title: Re: Da Vinci Code Is Dangerous |
05 Jun 2006 03:50:55 PM |
|
|
In article <jhachmann-75804E.21314204062006@news.giganews.com>, johac
<jhachmann@sbcglobal.com> wrote:
In article <r-0406060613490001@192.168.1.101>,
r@somis.org (•R L Measures) wrote:
In article <jhachmann-A92D55.22444803062006@news.giganews.com>, johac
<jhachmann@sbcglobal.com> wrote:
In article <r-0306060412380001@192.168.1.100>,
r@somis.org (•R L Measures) wrote:
In article <jhachmann-AE2388.21554902062006@news.giganews.com>, johac
<jhachmann@sbcglobal.com> wrote:
In article <r-0206060453060001@192.168.1.100>,
r@somis.org (•R L Measures) wrote:
In article
<jhachmann-07F8A3.21500601062006@news.giganews.com>, johac
<jhachmann@sbcglobal.com> wrote:
In article <r-0106060246510001@192.168.1.100>,
r@somis.org (•R L Measures) wrote:
In article
<jhachmann-0CF138.21472631052006@news.giganews.com>, johac
<jhachmann@sbcglobal.com> wrote:
In article <r-3105060258510001@192.168.1.100>,
r@somis.org (•R L Measures) wrote:
In article
<jhachmann-65A48D.21513330052006@news.giganews.com>, johac
<jhachmann@sbcglobal.com> wrote:
...
"The devil never harmed the church so much as when the
church
herself
adopted the vow of celibacy."
- - Peter Comestor
...
Could be. It also might be that some girls my see the priests as
'father' figures (no pun intended).
• Damn! Are you suggesting something like what occurred in
the case
of
Mr. Lot? In her book "Women and Their Fathers", Victoria Secunda
states
that there are daughters who practice seduction by going after their
fathers.
I didn't read the book, but I think that it's widely believed
that many
women and girls are attracted to authority figures.
• so it seems, and there are undoubtedly those guys who are
attracted to
wicked-Wanda types.
I believe it's true that some men feel a need to be dominated.
• There's a business in Washington D. C. within sight of the Capital Dome
that gets c.$165 for a 40-minute session. The owner said that a goodly
number of her regular customers are congressmen.
Strange, but I don't find that very surprising.
• Agreed
Freud might say that
it's a father surrogate, but it might be more something left
over from
evolution where females usually go for the alpha male.
• I go with the alpha male.
Good.
...
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "V S Rawat" |
|
| Title: Re: Da Vinci Code Is Dangerous |
17 May 2006 02:51:33 PM |
|
|
R L Measures wrote:
In article
<jhachmann-9DF197.23595816052006@news.giganews.com>, johac
<jhachmann@sbcglobal.com> wrote:
In article <4cudcuF17hg7aU1@individual.net>,
"Robibnikoff" <witchypoo@broomstick.com> wrote:
"George" <nospam@nospamhotmail.com> wrote in message
news:UIkag.6098$z97.80171@news20.bellglobal.com...
Let's make sure people know that Brown is a total phoney
when he says or hints that his novel is based on real
research. Let's let people
know what
the lies are. But beyond that, let's no overreact. The
Catholic Faith is timeless. It can't really be shaken by
a novel or a movie.
Then why all the pissing and moaning about the movie?
I don't understand either. It's fiction. ...
The Roman church tolerates men who are into boys. Any
suggestion that its founder was into girls is not likely to be
well received.
girls? plural?
You seem to have some inner info about The Da Vinci Code II.
:-)
--
Rawat
.
|
|
|
| User: "•R L Measures" |
|
| Title: Re: Da Vinci Code Is Dangerous |
17 May 2006 11:11:16 PM |
|
|
In article <xn0emcydk783yj000@xananews>, "V S Rawat"
<VSRawat@Invalid.none> wrote:
R L Measures wrote:
In article
<jhachmann-9DF197.23595816052006@news.giganews.com>, johac
<jhachmann@sbcglobal.com> wrote:
In article <4cudcuF17hg7aU1@individual.net>,
"Robibnikoff" <witchypoo@broomstick.com> wrote:
"George" <nospam@nospamhotmail.com> wrote in message
news:UIkag.6098$z97.80171@news20.bellglobal.com...
Let's make sure people know that Brown is a total phoney
when he says or hints that his novel is based on real
research. Let's let people
know what
the lies are. But beyond that, let's no overreact. The
Catholic Faith is timeless. It can't really be shaken by
a novel or a movie.
Then why all the pissing and moaning about the movie?
I don't understand either. It's fiction. ...
The Roman church tolerates men who are into boys. Any
suggestion that its founder was into girls is not likely to be
well received.
girls? plural?
*** Any guy whose nickname is The Almighty undoubtedly has one that can
handle more than one.
You seem to have some inner info about The Da Vinci Code II.
:-)
*** Not at all, I'm only guessing that the guy who called himself "the
Son of man" was a hetero.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Michael Gray" |
|
| Title: Re: Da Vinci Code Is Dangerous |
17 May 2006 05:08:03 AM |
|
|
On Tue, 16 May 2006 23:59:58 -0700, johac <jhachmann@sbcglobal.com>
wrote:
- Refer: <jhachmann-9DF197.23595816052006@news.giganews.com>
In article <4cudcuF17hg7aU1@individual.net>,
"Robibnikoff" <witchypoo@broomstick.com> wrote:
"George" <nospam@nospamhotmail.com> wrote in message
news:UIkag.6098$z97.80171@news20.bellglobal.com...
Let's make sure people know that Brown is a total phoney when he says or
hints that his novel is based on real research. Let's let people know what
the lies are. But beyond that, let's no overreact. The Catholic Faith is
timeless. It can't really be shaken by a novel or a movie.
Then why all the pissing and moaning about the movie?
I don't understand either. It's fiction. Not true. Unreal. Made up. A
story. A tall tale. If they don't like it, they don't have to see the
movie or read the book.
<shakes head>
Some people need to get lives.
It should have dawned on you by now that Christians are self-selected
to be utterly incapable of discerning fiction from fact!
--
Michael Gray.
Founding Member and Doorman,
Earthquack's 666 Club.
EAC Trainee Inquisitor of the month (2nd runner up: April)
Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Dr Zen" |
|
| Title: Re: Da Vinci Code Is Dangerous |
17 May 2006 07:12:31 PM |
|
|
GIGO, innit. Michael Gray <fleetg@newsguy.spam.com> fed this in:
On Tue, 16 May 2006 23:59:58 -0700, johac <jhachmann@sbcglobal.com>
wrote:
- Refer: <jhachmann-9DF197.23595816052006@news.giganews.com>
In article <4cudcuF17hg7aU1@individual.net>,
"Robibnikoff" <witchypoo@broomstick.com> wrote:
"George" <nospam@nospamhotmail.com> wrote in message
news:UIkag.6098$z97.80171@news20.bellglobal.com...
Let's make sure people know that Brown is a total phoney when he says or
hints that his novel is based on real research. Let's let people know what
the lies are. But beyond that, let's no overreact. The Catholic Faith is
timeless. It can't really be shaken by a novel or a movie.
Then why all the pissing and moaning about the movie?
I don't understand either. It's fiction. Not true. Unreal. Made up. A
story. A tall tale. If they don't like it, they don't have to see the
movie or read the book.
<shakes head>
Some people need to get lives.
It should have dawned on you by now that Christians are self-selected
to be utterly incapable of discerning fiction from fact!
Jeezus, if this is the standard of the atheists, I'm almost tempted to
become a Christian.
--
Dr Zen
I hold their faces in my hands
and I think what a cruel thing
that they should even exist;
what a cruel thing that they should grow
to hope, to burn, to live, and lose it all,
sooner or later, in their own dark sun of pain.
http://gollyg.blogspot.com
.
|
|
|
| User: "Michelle Malkin" |
|
| Title: Re: Da Vinci Code Is Dangerous |
20 May 2006 12:37:08 AM |
|
|
"Dr Zen" <longhornster@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:ruen6213gc2o7t6orr74ea2kknc2f6thvm@4ax.com...
GIGO, innit. Michael Gray <fleetg@newsguy.spam.com> fed this in:
On Tue, 16 May 2006 23:59:58 -0700, johac <jhachmann@sbcglobal.com>
wrote:
- Refer: <jhachmann-9DF197.23595816052006@news.giganews.com>
In article <4cudcuF17hg7aU1@individual.net>,
"Robibnikoff" <witchypoo@broomstick.com> wrote:
"George" <nospam@nospamhotmail.com> wrote in message
news:UIkag.6098$z97.80171@news20.bellglobal.com...
Let's make sure people know that Brown is a total phoney when he says
or
hints that his novel is based on real research. Let's let people know
what
the lies are. But beyond that, let's no overreact. The Catholic Faith
is
timeless. It can't really be shaken by a novel or a movie.
Then why all the pissing and moaning about the movie?
I don't understand either. It's fiction. Not true. Unreal. Made up. A
story. A tall tale. If they don't like it, they don't have to see the
movie or read the book.
<shakes head>
Some people need to get lives.
It should have dawned on you by now that Christians are self-selected
to be utterly incapable of discerning fiction from fact!
Jeezus, if this is the standard of the atheists, I'm almost tempted to
become a Christian.
If you're the type of person who thinks that a
comment by one person is the standard for an
entire group, what makes you think any of us
would want you - atheist or not.
--
^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^
Michelle Malkin (Mickey) aa list#1
BAAWA Knight & Bible Thumper Thumper
^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^
--
Dr Zen
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Elroy Willis" |
|
| Title: Re: Da Vinci Code Is Dangerous |
17 May 2006 07:21:45 AM |
|
|
johac <jhachmann@sbcglobal.com> wrote in alt.atheism
Robibnikoff <witchypoo@broomstick.com> wrote:
George <nospam@nospamhotmail.com> wrote in message
Let's make sure people know that Brown is a total phoney when he says or
hints that his novel is based on real research. Let's let people know what
the lies are. But beyond that, let's no overreact. The Catholic Faith is
timeless. It can't really be shaken by a novel or a movie.
Then why all the pissing and moaning about the movie?
I don't understand either. It's fiction. Not true. Unreal. Made up. A
story. A tall tale. If they don't like it, they don't have to see the
movie or read the book.
Some of the ideas in the book are true, though, such as the fact that
the books in the Bible were voted on by men as to which ones to
include and throw away. I've seen a lot of complaints about that idea
from Christians who think the Bible was mysteriously compiled by their
god.
--
Elroy Willis
www.elroysemporium.com
.
|
|
|
| User: "Derek Janssen" |
|
| Title: Re: Da Vinci Code Is Dangerous |
17 May 2006 12:15:04 PM |
|
|
Elroy Willis wrote:
johac <jhachmann@sbcglobal.com> wrote in alt.atheism
Robibnikoff <witchypoo@broomstick.com> wrote:
George <nospam@nospamhotmail.com> wrote in message
Let's make sure people know that Brown is a total phoney when he says or
hints that his novel is based on real research. Let's let people know what
the lies are. But beyond that, let's no overreact. The Catholic Faith is
timeless. It can't really be shaken by a novel or a movie.
Then why all the pissing and moaning about the movie?
Not the movie, just the follow-through, and How to Stop It, If We Can:
You can tell a 9-yo. that there isn't really a Hogwarts Academy and that
the author made it up, and he'll say "Sure, I know"...
You can tell an adult there isn't really a DaVinci Code--and that the
author might think there is doesn't excuse him from the possibility of
being a total loopmeister--and he'll point to half a dozen documentaries
and bestsellers that explain how there really IS one, because it's so
neat and controversial, and explores so many hidden feministic truths
that Church authority doesn't want you to know!
(...Which explains why I, for one, write for kids.)
I don't understand either. It's fiction. Not true. Unreal. Made up. A
story. A tall tale. If they don't like it, they don't have to see the
movie or read the book.
Some of the ideas in the book are true, though, such as the fact that
the books in the Bible were voted on by men as to which ones to
include and throw away.
(The ones discarded giving rise to the word we enjoy today, "Apocryphal".)
I've seen a lot of complaints about that idea
from Christians who think the Bible was mysteriously compiled by their
god.
In fact, there's a fair amount of evidence that Shakespeare scripted
parts of the Bible (well, a few of the Psalms, for starters):
King James needed name poets--not to mention ones with a professional
schooling in Greek Translation--to punch up the final text, and being
one of the post-Elizabethan King's Men meant you knew who was paying
your salary, and you didn't turn down a hire-job.
Derek Janssen (off-topic for some groups, but proving once again that
atheism does not hold the monopoly on Smart People)
ejanss@comcast.net
.
|
|
|
| User: "Elroy Willis" |
|
| Title: Re: Da Vinci Code Is Dangerous |
17 May 2006 03:56:01 PM |
|
|
Derek Janssen <ejanss@nospam.comcast.net> wrote in alt.atheism
Elroy Willis wrote:
johac <jhachmann@sbcglobal.com> wrote in alt.atheism
Robibnikoff <witchypoo@broomstick.com> wrote:
Then why all the pissing and moaning about the movie?
Not the movie, just the follow-through, and How to Stop It, If We Can:
You can tell a 9-yo. that there isn't really a Hogwarts Academy and that
the author made it up, and he'll say "Sure, I know"...
You can tell an adult there isn't really a DaVinci Code--and that the
author might think there is doesn't excuse him from the possibility of
being a total loopmeister--and he'll point to half a dozen documentaries
and bestsellers that explain how there really IS one, because it's so
neat and controversial, and explores so many hidden feministic truths
that Church authority doesn't want you to know!
I've actually read the book, have you? I have my copy right here and
can flip to whatever page you need if you have some questions about
it...
(...Which explains why I, for one, write for kids.)
What does that explain, exactly? You lost me...
| | | |
