I don’t mind sarcasm like that. But I’m really getting tired of seeing serious bashing threads like this, especially after Allah said he’d try to watch over it. What a freaking liar.

WillBarrett on November 27, 2007 at 11:49 PM

LOL, Will. I don’t think Sydney will get your sarcasm based on your last two posts though.

But I enjoyed them, nonetheless.

Sydney Carton on November 27, 2007 at 11:14 PM

YOU CAN’T HANDLE THE TRUTH, SYDNEY. Your Church is E-V-I-L. Remember, I know a lot Catholics who left the Church and became either an evangelical like me or an atheist. Therefore the Catholic church must be bad. QED. Plus, I follow the Bible while all you do is worship Mary, and light candles, and do WHATEVER THE POPE TELLS YOU.

So let me get this straight…

Allah promises to follow this thread and stay on top of it, and it degenerates into a disgusting rant over how the Catholic Church is about money and power and some strange complaint about birth control.

Sydney Carton on November 27, 2007 at 11:14 PM

Lighten up Francis, I mean Sydney. I and others successfully defended the Pope’s “honor” and the argument by the Catholic dissenters was proven frivolous and baseless.

All in good fun in the land of free cyber-speech.

Allah promises to follow this thread and stay on top of it, and it degenerates into a disgusting rant over how the Catholic Church is about money and power and some strange complaint about birth control.

I don’t know why any Catholic bothers with this blog sometimes. I can’t believe Michelle would approve of this stuff. And you should be ashamed of yourself, Allah, for allowing this kind of thing to go on here, especially when you promised to keep order. I wonder if you really are glad over posts like these. If so, then you have a serious problem.

In the name of JESUS, MY PERSONAL BUDDY AND SAVIOR.

Had to find it, but it’s there. Helping poor people is a common theme, but eradicating poverty, according to this passage, will never happen. Maybe someone should tell the Democrats that.

ThackerAgency on November 27, 2007 at 5:45 PM

I have found this
book
and this book to be very informative, knowledgeable, and relevant about the issue of Bible and Economics.

Yeah, aside from the minor detail the “no birth control” policy extends to the entire world, not just America, and has been around for decades.

Centuries actually.

It’s hardly an exclusively Catholic agenda. Examine Bush’s policy in Uganda, his insistence on abstinence and the resulting decline in AIDS.

To Gregor and his ilk I would say, paraphrasing Marx, “You’ve nothing to lose but your license to self-gratification.”

I agree that the Pope has little or no influence on world affairs.

The Pope has little or no political influence on world affairs but he has a profound moral influence on the world which does tend to reverberate from time to time.

Even his influence among Catholics is minimal (the vast majority use birth control and many have had divorces).

No they don’t.

Why do you think there are so many pro-choice Catholics when the Church has been fighting for pro-life causes for so long?

I don’t know but it might have something to do with Paul’s Letter to the Bostonians.

- The Cat

I didn’t realize that poverty was a sin. It says in the Bible that there has always been poverty and there always will be poverty.

ThackerAgency on November 27, 2007 at 5:37 PM

That it does. I suppose the argument is that we have the ability to redistribute our wealth so that everyone can live well above poverty. And we choose not to. Our inaction to help our fellow man and acknowledge their human dignity is a sin. A social sin.

I disagree with him, and I agree with you. His Eminence is known to be more interested with Social Justice issues than doctrine. He’s also a very nice guy in person.

11 There will always be poor people in the land. Therefore I command you to be openhanded toward your brothers and toward the poor and needy in your land.

Had to find it, but it’s there. Helping poor people is a common theme, but eradicating poverty, according to this passage, will never happen. Maybe someone should tell the Democrats that.

ColtsFan on November 27, 2007 at 5:34 PM

Thank you. Excellently done.

He talked about poverty and the sin the world is in for letting this go on.

I didn’t realize that poverty was a sin. It says in the Bible that there has always been poverty and there always will be poverty.

Thank you for your lecture about what is, or is not, truly Christian of us. Please, if you would, equate your expertise on Christianity with Jesus Christ driving out [with force] those who were in the Temple. Of course, He saw what society thought about His Temple. Of course, He was angered by the spiritual voidness of the people. Of course, it angered Him. And, of course, He acted, not only with bitter words, but with violent action. Please, fill me in on your thoughts about Jesus Christ, and His actions in the Temple. Maybe you could lecture Him, too.

OhEssYouCowboys on November 27, 2007 at 5:04 PM

I will not trade words with you.

I will choose to only comment on your misinterpretation of Jesus, for the larger viewing audience.

First,

my comment was not intended as a “lecture” but as a call to urge professing Christians, me included, to imitate who we are supposed to be “professing about,” namely, the person and work of Jesus Christ.

Second,

your reference to a story in the Bible, in no way, supports the nasty tone and content of your original comment.

The Bible states that we as professing believers are to honor Jesus Christ with the proper tone and conduct of our speech.

For you to even equate your comment with a reference to Jesus driving people out of the Temple is sheer, hermeneutical foolishness on your part.

God ordains for his people to honor Him in our speech and conduct.

Third,

I have no intention on lecturing Jesus. He makes the rules, not me. Even the rules about honoring Jesus Christ with the proper attitude and speech.

To equate your vulgar comment with the actions of Jesus is really foolishness.

Not that the Church’s views are really having an impact on who uses birth control, but the Church knows that if Catholics stop having babies … the Church will eventually collapse. The Church is dependent on Catholics having children and raising them to be good Catholics. The Church is not exactly experiencing a large influx of Christians converting to Catholicism.

They are in developing countries. They are one of the leading forces there. That’s why Pope Benedict XVI is turning his sights to fighting Relativism, for which I must commend him.

Where do I begin? First of all, how do you know how much the Church gave to Mother Teresa? Enough said.

Also, I work for a Catholic Church in the inner city. We do NOT have a lot of money; most of the value of the (worldwide) Church is in properties and buildings which are supposed to last for generations and generations. Day to day expenses? I don’t have the worldwide figures, but most churches in my diocese are living hand to mouth. And this is, I might add, as it should be, if as Christians we trust in our Father for our daily bread, not our yearly bread.

inviolet on November 27, 2007 at 5:13 PM

You must have misunderstood, because you are proving my point.

I don’t know how much exactly Mother Theresa was given. That’s why I said it was minimal and didn’t give a figure. Given the state her missions were in, I’m suspecting not much. I’m also guessing this because of my own experience with the diocese, and you can also guess this because of yours.

The Catholic Church in the Vatican does not spend much at all. Most tithes are kept at the local level, the Diocese only gets a small amount. Dioceses are expect to operate on their own income. Despite all the wealth of the Church in Rome it sits there, that’s troubling to me.

You are right, it’s in properties. Why should it be? They own large tracks of land in Europe. What use is it to the church? Can’t they sell it? How about all of the riches in the Vatican left uncounted. Can’t some of them go?

Jesus led the first Eucharist with a wooden cup. The Pope is fed on a plate of gold. His shoes alone are worth $400.

Oscar Andres Cardinal Rodriguez Maradiaga came to speak at my college. He talked about poverty and the sin the world is in for letting this go on. He urged for more aid, debt relief, and the elimination of the School for the Americas. After we were done we had a reception with the best food I have ever tasted. Wine, Cocoa and Coffee flavored roast beef, Apple Roast Beef, hor durbs (SP?), things I can’t even name.

And it must be tough to work in the inner cities. You have my prayers. And I’m sorry if this sounds insulting to you, I’m not talking about your own Parish, it sounds like they are earnestly doing the Lord’s work.

Given the unpopularity of their Birth Control stance one would think if their goal was converts that they would allow it.

Keljeck on November 27, 2007 at 4:23 PM

Not that the Church’s views are really having an impact on who uses birth control, but the Church knows that if Catholics stop having babies … the Church will eventually collapse. The Church is dependent on Catholics having children and raising them to be good Catholics. The Church is not exactly experiencing a large influx of Christians converting to Catholicism.

Birth Control follows logically from their Pro-Life stance

I don’t see the logic. I see the possibility for an emotional connection, but logic doesn’t support connecting “birth control” to a “pro-life stance.” There’s no life being taken by using birth control. It simply prevents a woman from becoming pregnant. Using that logic, then the Church should not be preaching abstinence, because those who practice abstinence are preventing the woman from becoming pregnant.

I would understand the argument against birth control more if the Church argued that sex is designed for reproduction, rather than physical pleasure. Unfortunately, this isn’t the argument they use.

And, of course, He acted, not only with bitter words, but with violent action. Please, fill me in on your thoughts about Jesus Christ, and His actions in the Temple. Maybe you could lecture Him, too.

Not addressed to me, but I’ll bite: Jesus Himself knew what would “wake up” certain people. Of course He did, He’s God.

Some would respond to, “come down from that tree, I’m staying at your house today,” some would respond to, “Let he who is without sin cast the first stone,” some would only be woken by a whip and righteous anger at turning God’s house into a moneychanger’s bazaar. He also had the unparalleled advantage of being both omniscient and without sin Himself, in dealing with sinners around Him.

But we’re not God. I can’t read AllahPundit’s soul, nor can you. Also, Jesus commanded us to “love one another as I have loved you” and “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.” Can’t be positive but I don’t think your first attack really qualified as agape. Perhaps you could explain to the other posters here how it does.

Now we’re getting somewhere. Come on, let’s see some righteous violence, people.

This will be a useful comment to refer back to in future religion threads.

Allahpundit on November 27, 2007 at 5:07 P

Ah, I see that you’re still READING ABOUT YOURSELF. Of course, you would read my quote as being a call to violence. When, in fact, it was simply proof that words and actions are sometimes needed, in order to deal with those who worship themselves, and disregard God. I might add, that the act of the Apostles in shaking the dust from their shoes, was hardly a “nice” act. But, of course, was an action used as a commentary on a spirtiually dead world. You know, your world.