Mother Teresa: deity had disappeared
http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8...00.html?cnn=yes



I consider this news as a great catastrophe in the modern history of the Catholic Church

Have you ever heard of the seven-headed dragon, Enki? Chop one head off and what do you get?

Enki, the story was front page in our National Post daily. I wrote the editor the following item:
=====================================================================
Regarding your front-page story (Saturday, August 25) about mother Teresa's
self-confessed lack of faith, which is only now coming to the light of
day:

Keep in mind that, despite the billions of prayers offered by her, the
Pope, bishops and clergy, and the millions of Christians (plus numerous other religions), too many people in the world continue to live in too much poverty, and experience too much pain, suffering and death. No wonder Mother Terese developed feelings of despair. It is quite understandable.

For similar reasons, I , the seventh child in a family of eight (five boys and three girls) went through a similar crisis of faith, in my early teens.

THE CAUSE OF MY CRISIS OF FAITH
===============================.
The cause? By the time I was five, I had experienced the death of my
eldest brother, my sister, her husband, her two children and my
mother. My father died when I was fourteen,, leaving my younger
sister and I in the care of four older siblings. Many other families
in our mining town, of over ten thousand people, suffered similar
losses. I remember that one mine-explosion killed twenty miners. It
seems that none of the many prayers offered in the many funeral
services, and church services, petitioning God for help did much good.

In addition to the above, Bell Island was directly involved in World
War II. In 1942, enemy U Boats attacked our island, twice, and sank
four ore carriers, causing a heavy loss of life. In addition, the
church-operated school, which I attended, burned to the ground when I
was fifteen; Even when, in 1945, an uncertain peace finally came,
stories of the holocaust, and other dreadful stories of what went on
during the war came to the surface. There was also the fear of more
wars breaking out.

As I matured enough to ask questions, the above, plus the knowledge
which I was got from my high school studies, influenced me to question
the teachings I got about there being an all-powerful and all-loving
God and Heavenly Father ready and willing to answer all our prayers
for help and "deliver us from evil". I kept asking, when?

Looking back, I remember that for a short time I almost did become an
atheist. I ask myself: What was it that prevented me from doing so? My
explanation is this: Around the time I was old enough to think, I came
under the influence of a caring minister, teachers at the school, and
a wise Sunday-school teacher. When I expressed my concerns, not one
ever told us to fear God and keep silent. All encouraged me and others
to think for ourselves, keep on asking questions and to accept that
there is nothing wrong with honest doubt, as long as we did not give
in to a bitter cynicism. It was with this frame of mind that I went
off to university at seventeen.

I LEARNED TO BE FREE TO BELIEVE THAT WHICH IS RATIONAL
=====================================================
Again, in university I, fortunately, met some wise teachers. In the
major studies of philosophy, psychology, theology, etc., we were
taught that it was not necessary to have a blind, fixed and dogmatic
faith in a human-like God dwelling in a distant Heavenly Kingdom.
Instead, we were encouraged to have a pragmatic, science-based and
sighted faith--one which, while it may go beyond reason, need never go
contrary to it. I learned that a blind faith is not worth believing;
that it is possible to think of God, not as a three-dimensional being,
but as that which is in and through all things, including the
microcosm (atoms and molecules) and the macrocosm (the cosmos).

BEYOND THEISM and ON TO PROCESS THEOLOGY
===========================================
Later research led me to the discover process philosophy and theology.
It was the work of the great mathematician, Alfred North Whitehead
(1861 - 1947). http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/whitehead/
His theology led me to what some thinkers call 'panentheism' (not to
be confused with pantheism).

GOD AS GOODNESS, ORDER AND DESIGN
To avoid confusion, I like to call it 'unitheism', which sees G�˜D
(Note the way I spell God.) not as a being, but as the oneness of all
being--total, universal and all-encompassing, in which all that is,
including us, exists. We may not understand it all; but how can we
doubt our own being within being itself? Emulating Descartes: We
think, therefore, we are.

MOTHER TERESA'S DESPAIR WAS THE RESULT OF HER BEING INDOCTRINATED
===========================================================
I suspect that Mother Teresa's despair was not her fault; it was caused by the way she was indoctrinated. IMHO, it was the result of her being taught a very incomplete--some would say false--theology. She was dogmatically indoctrinated to accept, blindly, the beliefs of traditional theism.

She was enough of a thinker not to accept the belief in an objective, three-dimensional and personal god with a subjective mind. The despair
came because there was a conflict between her desire to please her
"superiors" and, at the same time, use her rational mind.

In the light of the above, what can we hope for? As one who accepts the
principles of process theology, I believe that it is possible that
there is life beyond the physical death of the body. Because of this,
I also believe there will be the opportunity for all of us, including
people like Mother Teresa, to, sooner or later, develop a rational and
sighted faith and live with peace of mind. I am very thankful that my
opportunity came sooner.

Rev. Lindsay G. King

Commmeon Code, even I do exist, who cares?! Dragons are nice creatures of the fairy-tales and people see them when eat magic mushrooms before wiring stories about seven-headed dragons.

___

Lindsay, I respect your activities, but I just pointed at the fact.
It is really very, very serious catastrophe.
Catholic Church does not realize that it is under very serious attack.
I do really wonder how long that euthanasia regime of the Catholic Church will continue to process?
If I been the Catholic God then I would send the Bishops to the hell for such lethargic regime of existence of the Catholic Church.

Catholic Church is a very retarded organization, from the intellectual point of view, but it is one of the cornerstones of the Western Civilization, if it cracks the foundation cracks. After series of pedophilic scandals in US this new info very seriously questions credibility of the faith.

Certainly I do not accentuate on necessity to present Old Buddy Jesus in an innovated way, but things cannot go on in such a way any longer.

Ha, ha! very funny joke at my expense! ;-) But seriously now, I was just making an alegoric connection to the fact that powerful institutions such as the catholic church is unmovable. Scandals such as this face them off very easily. They're like the cat in your avatar: They make sure their shit have enough dirt over it so as it won't stink at all. About the shrooms joke, though. I don't take any. I wish I did. They are really good concsioussness modifiers, if I remember correctly from my younger days. I still love mushrooms in my dinner, though. What do you call a mushroom that goes into a bar and buys everybody a drink, by the way: A Fungi!

Many modern consumers, believers, investors, voters, John and Mary Does, whoever, have the feeling that they are being treated--by the so-called experts and/or authorities-- like mushrooms. They are expected to thrive and live in the dark and live off the few shovels full of drek, which is thrown to them, now and then.

Amen to that!

So, what are WE going to do about it all? Are we just going to sit here and agree to be faithful mushrooms? Soup fodder? And take all that DREK?

BTW, I like that word, 'drek'.

LET US GET RID OF THE BORING 'F' WORD
===========================
To replace it, I nominate 'drek'. In combination with 'bumf' it could be of real value. How it rolls off the tongue! "What are those drekking politicians--and other know-it-all expert drekkers up to now???? Their heads, minds and hearts are so full of bumf I can smell it as it flows from their reeking, and drekking, mouths!!!!!!"

What is wrong with you, Lindsay?!

CB, you ask, rhetorically, I surmise, "What's wrong with you, Lindsay?"

To which I respond: Since it is you who asks such a question, I leave it up to you to tell us: What do you presume is wrong?

Sense of humor that is one of the things that guards our soul in this crazy world under the sun.
Please do not compare Catholic Church with my avatar. My avatar is sacred. The eyes of the
Cheshire Cat look at people for many centuries from the space between the letters and words of many books in hope that a hero or a dreamy boy or girl will trace the smile and the eyes of the Cat between the lines. And eventually will find the wardrobe gateway to Narnia.

Catholic Church has many problems; mass media help to make them visible and transparent.
I agree with you that the guys from the Catholic Church have great experience in coding, but that is a primitive Linear Linguistic Programming of the population. On the other hand as an organization driven by boys who cannot get married it has no chances to escape scandals in the contemporary world as there are so many temptations that hardly young priests will be able to resist esp. at presence of proactive encroachments of the you know whom.

As I once mentioned they cannot fight MTV and porno industry, they themselves cannot properly control their own passions in such acid environment. You think why some Arabs become terrorists when they come to West? They just become mad after interacting with F**K&Suck philosophy of Western teenagers, and start to see in all of that the great Satan instead of the Big Tits, because they already are coded buy the MollaHs (HalloWs ) at their home country. Very simple. Imagine a young priest who should spread Gospel in the contemporary world among teenagers. That is why the scandals erupt.

But words of Jesus should not be mixed with the dogmatic outlook of the Catholic Church I guess. You can replace mushroom with Coca-Cola it has the same effect btw.

But you cannot be sure that it is really so. They have other approach. You cannot say that it is wrong because you cannot prove that your is right.

ten-four, nightrover!

Well Code it is not nightrover approach case.
Please do not mix.

It was meant as a joke. Sorry, Enki!

To what are you referring when you say, "your is right"?

I am talking about the mode of argumentation.

It is a big mistake to put hope in gods and heavens that do not exist. Mother Teresa should have taken the hint and sought the true meaning of life. Then her smile could have been less deceptive.

Rick, IMHO, because your opinion agrees with my opinion, I feel that your opinion is the best opinion, right?

BTW, in Latin there are two basic kinds of 'faith'.

First, there is fides. Second, there is fiducia.

For example, when I say that I believe that there is a bank located at....I am simply stating what I believe is true. This is 'fides'. It is a kind of ordinary belief, lacking enthusiasm and any real confidence.

However, if I choose to visit the bank, and if I agree to put my money on deposit there, this is, fidiucia'-- this is, real confidence, involving my action.`Fiducia is ordinary belief, plus action.

In my opinion, Mother Teresa--and I speak without being judgmental--had fides. That is, she had a very ordinary faith in things as they are.

However, she lacked fiducia. That is, she failed to develop the feeling of confidence that what she believed, intellectually, was, or would be, actually true.

It is my opinion that most of us face this same kind of challenge.

This begs many questions. To begin with, we could ask: Who among us is really CERTAIN that what we say we believe to be true, is true?

BTW, I feel it is okay to be wrong.

It's not always OK to be wrong, especially when being wrong can have real consequences. For example, it was wrong to illegally invade Iraq. A million Iraqis have been killed, injured, or displaced.

"It's not always OK to be wrong..." Rick.
Point well taken, Rick.
Perhaps here is what I should have said: "As fallible beings we are all capable of making mistakes. But sometimes it is better to make a mistake than do nothing. However, we should always be ready to learn from our mistakes. Then we need to do our best, with the help of others, not to keep on making them."

You know Lindsay, I think that the Republican Party can adapt these statements and be very successful during 2008 campaign in the continental banana-states of the United States which regularly vote for them in any case.

Point well taken, Enki. Why throw the bums out? Give them another chance! Surely they will be repentant!

Haven't had your bellyfull of Republicanism yet? Of course not. They're only human. They can learn from their mistakes. We should be more tolerant of evil and incompetence.

In my opinion the Republican Party as a party fundamentally ruined philosophic credibility of the fundamental concepts of Democracy so carefully cultivated by the founding fathers of the United States. They damaged not only US interests, they fundamentally damaged very serious conceptual achievements of the entire mankind. I think that party must go off and even more I think a new intellect-orientated federalist party should emerge in US and the Republicans should start to get disbanded as a party.

I came to that conclusion after reading George Tenet’s book named "At the center of the storm."

What, and you think the democrats will be any better? After you get passed their libertarian agenda and their equal rights trumpet, you'll find out what I did awhile back: That politics in a modern democratic society such as the American one boils down to one party, two names.

Hey, maybe I can get a job as a speech-writer for the Repubs, eh?
Meanwhile, I am involved in the next provincial elections here in Ontario. They will be held on October 10.
http://www.freedomparty.on.ca/

WHY I AM RUNNING FOR PUBLIC OFFICE.
YOUR HELP IS APPRECIATED
=========================================================
Over the years, on more than one occasion, I have taken part in the process of trying to get elected to public office--all without much success.

In my first attempt, while I was an active minister, I ran for the public school board. Later--after I retired--I ran for mayor of Markham. Later still, I ran for office provincially and federally.

BTW, I elected to get involved, not just to get elected--even though it would be nice--but because I wanted to see how things play out in real life. I have always considered politics to be part of the drama of life and I have this weird desire to be part of the drama, not just spectator.

This prompts me to ask: Does anyone think I am nuts? Or just an arrogant egotist?

Meanwhile, any advice anyone cares to give me, which will help me in my current effort, will be greatly appreciated.

BTW 2, I read somewhere that Abraham Lincoln ran for office sixteen times before he got elected. O well! I am not sure that I am all that patient.

Things must be in constant change to avoid decay.

Why not?!

E.g.
Oh my dear beloved Americans!!! The Republican Party always was standing on defense of democracy all around the world. Nonetheless many Arabian terrorists and liberal politicians claim that we support non-democratic regimes in Arabian world (and actually all over the world) to pump their resources by utilizing the inclinations of those non-democratic regimes to corruption, but these all is a lie we firmly spread democracy all around the world. Our great democrats work from day through night in the Pentagon to spread democracy around the world. You should believe us. Our enemies claim that half of the world hates us, and the other half just keeps silence following selfish economic interests, but these all is a lie. People all around the world drink Coca-Cola and this is the best manifestation that people all around the world love and respect our policy. Some say that our true motto is "Democracy is only for Americans," but it is a lie too, we want to spread democracy to other nations too, but not in a way the British Empire did, our way is the best way! Join us, vote for us and you shall know the truth and the truth shall make you free! We will make you free and together we will make them all free. So we will make them. Vote for Republican Party and we will make them together! Omen.

Enki: Your comments bring up a favourite theme of mind: Building a just and peaceful political economy.

FEATHERS COVER THE WHOLE BIRD
==============================
Feathers, not only help keep the wings and body of the whole bird in balance, they provide harmony and balance for the bird as a whole.

Collectively speaking, if we humans beings ever became, truly fully functioning human beings--that is, moral, ethical and god-like beings--any political and economic system, whether it be left-wing, right-wing, or centre, would probably work well.

WHAT IS THE IDEAL FORM OF GOVERNMENT?
=====================================
Come to think of it, perhaps the best and most efficient form of government is one run by an all-wise, all-powerful but benevolent, all-merciful and loving dictator--the kind of person scientific humanists like Rick feel we can become.

Christian fundamentalists have the same idea in mind when they talk about the Kingdom of God. To this day they preach seriously that this Kingdom is just around the corner. When Jesus comes he will set up this ideal kingdom in Jerusalem where he will reign as, "King of King and Lord of lords. And He shall reign, forever, and ever."

THE DIVINE RIGHT OF KINGS AND/OR PRESIDENTS
==========================================
Think about this, for a moment. It is not surprising that a variety of theocratic and autocratic monarchs, throughout history, have all claimed to be benevolent rulers who were appointed by the gods, or God, to administer political and economic justice. Belief in the divine right of kings/presidents and that he was a wise and just ruler, cost Charles I, of England, his head.

CHARLES I WAS ACTUALLY A HUMANIST
=================================
In practical terms, here is what Charles I told his subjects, including his advisers: "God has appointed me to do what is best for England. Why waste time consulting Parliament when we can go directly to God, through me? All you have to do is say your prayers, as will I. Therefore, what I decide to do will be the answer to all our prayers. The will of God will thus be done."
He spoke theistically, but he acted like a humanist. In effect he made himself God, in human form. No doubt he probably felt he was doing the right thing.

And king Charles was not the first one to believe this. Long before him, all kings, the pharaohs of Egypt, the kings of Israel and Judah, the emperors of Rome, the czars of Russia, and all other nations, all claimed, at one time or another, to be wise and just rulers. But, unfortunately, very few of them actually came close to the ideal. Even those who claimed that God guided them, frequently failed in being good and just.This led people to rebel.

Some nations, such as England--after the commonwealth of Cromwell--became constitutional monarchies. Some, like France and the USA, became republics. Later, some republics, for example, Russia, under communism, became autocratic republics. Others, like the USA, and Canada, became more or less democratic. However, because we are not perfect, yet, we need to keep on struggling to find that political and economic system which is truly democratic and utilitarian--one which and does do the greatest good for the greatest number of people. Given that most people agree that republics and/or constitutional monarchies are the best political systems, what is the best economic system.

WHAT ARE THE OPTIONS
First we need to ask: What are the options? Broadly speaking, the options are capitalism, on the right, and socialism on the left.

CAPITALISM
==========
In his, A Dictionary of Canadian Economics, David Crane, who writes a column on business and economics for the Toronto Star, defines 'capitalism' as "an economic and political system in which the means of production are largely privately owned and the rights of private property are respected by the state according to the RULE OF LAW and due process."He goes on to say that "the role of government is to protect individuals against the abuse of power, to protect the public interest, and to maintian an economic climate in whiich private entrepreneurs can make a profit."

ADAM SMITH founder of Classical Economics. In the 18th Century, as a reaction against government interference--Monarchs and their lackeys loved to interfere with business--the belief in unrestricted private enterprise emerged. Laissez-faire economists, such as Adam Smith (1723-1790), the father of political economy and of the CLASSICAL SCHOOL of economics, in his great book, The Wealth of Nations (1776)--the first complete work on the political economy--states that labor, and not land or money, is the real source of a nation's wealth.

This concept, the, LABOUR THEORY OF VALUE, was later taken up by Karl Marx (1818-1883). Smith also argued for free trade and a free market. He argued for trade unrestricted by government controls or by monopolies. He wrote that individuals know best what is good for them and that under the influence of the profit motive they would turn out products most desired by the consumer. He sought to harness self-interest to the common good. But I don't agree that Smith argued, anywhere, for unbridled capitalism--the kind that has got us into so much trouble in modern times.

SOCIALISM
=========
Socialism, that is, democratic socialism, is not to be confused with communism and/or national socialism, nazism. Socialism is both a doctrine and a movement. It is a political and economic system which, in practice, comes in all shapes and forms. It is fair to say that 'socialism' is a much abused term. Many people believe in both democracy, a political idea, and in socialism, an economic idea. Consider this: A city owning an electric power plant or a water purification system is no less an example of socialism than a national government owning a railway. Credit Unions and Cooperatives are forms of socialism. Our medicare system is a form of socialism. Who but the wealthy and powerful few would like to see us abandon a national form of medicare?

COMMUNISM
===========
Crane defines communism as "An economic and political system in which all private property, aside from consumer goods, is abolished, and the state not only owns all the means of production but relies on central planning rather than on market forces to determine the allocation of resources, prices, new investments, and output. Marx thought of socialism as the precursor to communism--the ideal state of things, yet to come. Communism, it is said, thinks of labour as organized, “for the common benefit of all members; the professed principle being that each should work according to his capacity, and receive according to his wants.�

In other words, "To each according to his needs; from each according to his ability. Sounds good as an ideal and in theory; but it hasn't worked out this way, in practice.

FEATHERS ECONOMICS ABHORS EXTREMES OF WEALTH AND POVERTY
===========================================================
When I use the words, "feathers economics", I use them to describe an approach to economics which, motivated by charity, or love--works to balance left wing and right wing functions to the benefit of the whole bird. Keep in mindl, feathers cover the whole bird, not just the wings.

WINSTON CHURCHILL SOUGHT BALANCE
Years ago, before the rise of the Labour Party in Britain, most members the British Parliament, like in Canada, were either Liberal or Conservative. Winston Churchill annoyed his fellow members by crossing the house, on more than one occasion.This prompted one member to ask:

"Mr. Churchill, do you not have a strong opinion on these important issues? Where do you stand?" He replied: "I stand in the extreme centre." In my opinion Churchill was looking for the feathers approach to the political economomy. like Churchill, I believe that the right direction for government is one that avoids the extremes of right or left.

THE ALL-IMPORTANT TAIL FEATHERS--a metaphor for governent
==================================================
Keep in mind that every feather on the body of the bird (we the people) is important, especially those on the wings. But what good would the wings be without the tail feathers humbly situated right over the anus? Remove the tail feathers and no bird it could not possibly fly, no matter how powerful the wings. Interestingly, there would also be a problem if the tail feathers were not quite flexible.

WHAT IS GOOD GOVERNMENT ALL ABOUT
===================================
For me, tail-feathers is a metaphor for good government.

In other words, good government is one which operates like tail feathers; one which is humble enough not to rule from the head, but from the rear, with the welfare of the whole body in mind.

Good government is one which helps the head (that is, we the people) navigate all of us, with integrity, to the best possible sources of supply. Thus it help us consume wisely, digest efficiently and re-cycle fully. This tail-feathers approach to good government also oversees the management of so-called waste, which is not really waste at all. For example, properly deposited, bird guano is an excellent fertilizer

BTW 2, we discussed this awhile back under the topic:
How left wing, right wing are you?

http://brainmeta.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=17522&hl=

Thank you for interesting refreshment of the topic. Maybe one day mankind will venture to construct the just and peaceful political economy all around the world. But first the Republicans must be pushed off from the white house.



There are rumors he believed he was a member of a prominent family which claimed its blood line from another very prominent person of divine offspring. So maybe that is why he was so stubborn.

That reminds me a hall, a long hall, have been standing in corner near an open window, there was a long table with red garment nearby extending along to the other wall of the hall, and afar there was a table with green garment, ark windows were covering entire right side of the hall, many sitting places in the hall. The window was open, there was a way leading to a river among small trees. A small boat touched the river bank area in front of the open ark window and guards guided a man to the hall which was on the second flour. The open window been looking at the man below, he raised his head and look at the hall’s windows, it was Charles I.

Enki, you write: "That reminds me a hall, a long hall, have been standing in corner near an open window, ... The open window been looking at the man below, he raised his head and look at the hall’s windows, it was Charles I."

Please translate.

Or do you want me to guess what you mean by the above?

While reading your previous post, when I reached the red colored part of the text, a recollection flashed in my mind, possibly due to red color. Possibly it is a recollection from a book or or superposition of recollections from books.
As far as I percept Charles I was judged in that hall and was sentenced to death.

I cannot remember from which book that flash came along.

Enki:

I revised my last post. Here it is:

WHAT IS GOOD GOVERNMENT ALL ABOUT
===================================
For me, tail-feathers is a metaphor for good government.

In other words, good government is one which operates like tail feathers; one which is humble enough not to rule from the head, but from the rear, with the welfare of the whole body in mind.

Good government is one which helps the head (that is, we the people) navigate all of us, with integrity, to the best possible sources of supply. Thus it help us consume wisely, digest efficiently and re-cycle fully. This tail-feathers approach to good government also oversees the management of so-called waste, which is not really waste at all. For example, properly deposited, bird guano is an excellent fertilizer

BTW 2, we discussed this awhile back under the topic:
How left wing, right wing are you?

http://brainmeta.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=17522&hl=

Ok.

No Comments

The Catholic Catastrophe Continues: Monsignor Tommaso Stenico from Holy See confirmed making advances to a young man and asserting that gay sex was not sinful.

... a young man had contacted La7 and said he had been in contact with several priests on chat lines popular with gay men. ...



http://edition.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/europe/1...r.ap/index.html

VATICAN CITY (AP) -- The Vatican said Saturday it has suspended a monsignor from a senior post at the Holy See after an Italian TV program using a hidden camera recorded him making advances to a young man and asserting that gay sex was not sinful.

The Vatican did not identify the monsignor by name.

But Monsignor Tommaso Stenico confirmed in a telephone interview with The Associated Press that he had been suspended from his post at the Vatican's Congregation for Clergy, an office which aims to ensure proper conduct by priests.

"Don't condemn me," Stenico said, adding that the program "was done fraudulently" because it used a hidden camera.

In the program on private Italian network La7, a man identified as a priest is heard saying that he "didn't feel he was sinning" by having sex with gay men.

Rome daily La Repubblica reported Saturday that Vatican officials recognized the monsignor's office in the background of the program, which aired October 1.

The Rev. Federico Lombardi, a Vatican spokesman, said the Italian monsignor was suspended while the case was under investigation.

"Higher-ups are evaluating the situation with the necessary reserve and with the obligatory respect for the person involved, even if this person has erred," Lombardi said.

Vatican officials "had to intervene decisively and with the severity required by conduct not compatible with priestly service and with the mission of the Holy See," he added.

While the Vatican rarely comments on individual sex scandals, this case directly touched the Holy See, apparently prompting the confirmation of the report.

Vatican teaching holds that homosexual activity is a sin.

Stenico said to call back later in the day when he would have more to say, but later attempts to reach him were not successful.

The Italian news agency ANSA quoted him as saying he had sent his superiors "a dutiful memo" about the case.

Milan daily Corriere della Sera had previously reported that a young man had contacted La7 and said he had been in contact with several priests on chat lines popular with gay men. Corriere said La7 then filmed encounters between the man and priests with a hidden camera.

A woman identifying herself as a producer for La7's "Exit" program declined to comment about the case, saying only that the program could be viewed on the network's Web site.

In the program, the faces of those speaking with the young man are obscured and their voices altered so they would not be recognized.

The man La Repubblica identified as the Vatican official can be heard saying that "he didn't feel he was sinning" by having sex with gay men and asking his visitor if he liked him.
___________________________________________________________________

The UC, in which I was ordained accepts homosexuality as part of being human. The Minister of the church I attend is a lesbian, I think. She does not flaunt it. As minister, she is free to perform same-sex marriages.

Bt the way, do a google on "United Church of Canada" and Pathwayschurch.ca, which I attend.

Keep in mind, any congregation which wishes to do so can opt out.

All have their own opinion on the subject.
What is the most strange it looks like that the God himself keeps silence on the subject. Maybe it is just a wrong impression?

Looks like some Free Pirates suppose that they captured YHWH 2000 years ago, just like Calypso in the Pirates of Caribbean.

Of course, you are right on.
Then you add: "What is the most strange, it looks like that the God himself keeps silence on the subject. Maybe it is just a wrong impression?"

GØD, as I understand it, is a concept which is not the same as the God concept. GØD is beyond space and time.

Then you add: "Looks like some Free Pirates suppose that they captured YHWH 2000 years ago, just like Calypso in the Pirates of Caribbean."

Agreed!

Well. You see we agree on many points.

Currently, I am reading a book "The DISAPPEARANCE of the UNIVERSE" by Gary R. Renard. It is based on the controversial "Course In Miracles", which I studied in the 1970's. Have you heard of it?

Interestingly, it says that the universe as it appears to human beings was not created by God, but by us. It is an illusion created by our collective ego. At this point, I am not sure that I understand what this all means, but I kind of agree with this point about the nature and creation of things. It fits in with how I conceive of GØD.

Apropos the above, the following news item about the actor, Brad Pitt, was on MSN this AM:
==========================================================

- Brad Pitt shunned religion because "it seemed to be about ego".
==========================================
The 'Ocean's Thirteen' star was brought up a Southern Baptist by his parents in Missouri, but abandoned his faith when he started college and "discovered himself".

Brad told Parade magazine: "I didn't understand this idea of a God who says, 'You have to acknowledge me. You have to say that I'm the best, and then I'll give you eternal happiness. If you won't, then you don't get it!'

"It seemed to be about ego. I can't see God operating from ego, so it made no sense to me.

"When I got untethered from the comfort of religion, it wasn't a loss of faith for me, it was a discovery of self."

...."Whoever said all men are born equal never left his own backyard. I see people everywhere without opportunity. I want to help level the playing field."

The 'Se7en' star is now father to three adopted children, Maddox, six, Pax, three and Zahara, two as well as 16-month-old daughter Shiloh with Angelina.

Isn't that what Shawn's been saying all along anyway?

Great! Now the imporant question is: What am I willing to do about this 'truth'? That is, if it is true. How many readers agree that it is?

I, for one totally agree with it. It gives me hope, and a real reason to live for. Along with the responsabilities that come with it. What are we to do about it? Thrive to make this existence as meaninful as possible so that we construct, in the process, an even better one.

That is an interesting point of view. I think following it one great Chinese emperor ordered to burn all old manuscripts to change the databases - the all springs off. I think those concepts are well imbedded in the Flat World concept of the Hog father movie. But what if those approaches are wrong and what if the true God really exists, has temper, habits etc. I do really wonder how people can dare to discard Tom Bombadillio who trickily changed the Frodo's ring thus saving the Middlearth from possible bad scenarios.

Bible confines human imagination and excessive freedom overshadows it with vanity. I think that the key to understanding of the God is the Golden Middle.

I think Shawn missed to consider possibility of God registering on the forum himself. e.g. for curiosity.
Why not?

And coming back to Mother Teresa case I want to note that Joseph Ratzinger must understand that the situation in the Christian world is extremely critical. Such situation cannot continue any longer.

Joseph must understand that he must make efforts to understand simple things

Here are supplementary keys

AVE Maria
EVA Maria
E(H)VA Ma(S)riA

32
George Washington
GeoWa
GEOWA

Yuri Vladimirovich Andropov (YVA)
Yuri (Gor'bachev) Vladimirovich Andropov
Y(G)VA

EVA Brown
E(Hitler)VA Brown
E(H)VA

I HAVE to say that it is very strange when people dare to ignore the role of Tom Bombadillio in the history of the Middle Earth (http://www.ratzingerfanclub.com/Tolkien/).

If some can ignore The Tom then how the others can ignore The Abraxas?

Enki writes.

This sounds like what Aristotle advocated in his "Golden mean"--Truth is that which lies within two extremes.

Sounds reasonable to me.

The old Greek wisdom. Tested and confirmed by ages.