Carlene

Nowhere do any of these "references" implicate the Pope in trying to "run" the country. Yes, individual bishops have spoken for/against political agendas regarding abortion and stem cell research, but that does NOT mean that they have been "ordered" by the Pope to do so, nor does it mean that they, in turn, have pressured parish priests across America to tell their parrishoners who to vote for. Unless you have been in a Catholic church and heard that with your own ears, then you don't know any such thing to be "true". I, on the other hand, have been in numerous Catholic churches and have NEVER heard a priest campaign for any individual or political party.

I thought you were opposed to bashing other people's beliefs? My mistake.

Inside the Vatican is published by lay people, not the Pope, and it does not speak for the Church.

Sunta...some people DO understand. I had a friend (now deceased) whose daughter married her high school sweetheart. Everyone thought they were "made for each other". They had a child. Their lives were wonderful - except that he was gay, and always had been. He finally could not live the lie any longer, nor was he willing to sneak around and cheat. They are divorced now, but remain friends. It's a tragedy for all concerned.

Bubble Butt....I promise not to accuse atheists of eating their young, if you will cease denigrating the Catholic Church. Do we have a deal?

I think the controversy you are referring to involved the threat of excommunication made toward legislators who voted against pro-life legislation. And that was two (I believe) very over-zealous priests (one may actually have been a bishop), who quickly back-pedaled and faded into the woodwork. The Catholic Church does not tell its membership how to vote. That might work somewhere else, but not in the USA.

Would you mind providing some reference for this? I have been voting in local, state and national elections for a long time and my church has NEVER attempted to influence my vote.

Absolutely.

I am a member of OH but don't post there much, or even lurk - not since a certain clown, whose posts make me absolutely WANT to puke, started hanging out there. The same reason I left a Yahoo group she was on - just made my teeth ACHE. Maybe that's just me, though. I may respond to that thread, however. I don't remember seeing any posters on LBT that said they suffered from Bulimia, post-band, or any who vomit voluntarily. I PB sometimes, and most of the time, it's my own damn fault. I eat too much, or I eat something I know will not suit my band. Other times, who knows what the deal is? The other day, I PBed ice cream.

The salad bar Catholics serve real wine and the Protestants serve grape juice. But the Protestant salad bars offer real bread (some of them, at least), while at the Catholics' you only get a wafer that looks/tastes like fish food. Also, the Catholics can't eat anything else for at least an hour before they approach the salad bar, but the Protestants can. There is a woman at my church who brings little slips of paper to Mass with her, pre-printed with an admonition not to chew gum prior to Communion, so as to be sure not to break the required fast. She taps people on the shoulder and shoves these little missives at them whenever she observes a gum-chewing transgressor. I call her the chewing gum police. My DH calls her something else.

We're all nuts, but welcome to our tree, QT. I am a Catholic by denomination, and I agree that Jesus does not define us by labels. I respect your beliefs, although I don't claim to be familiar with all of them. I think that if you are faithful to your beliefs you will be a stronger Christian for it. I once had a wonderful priest who told people who were considering conversion, "Do not consider this unless you are certain God has spoken to you and it's what YOU truly want. Don't convert for your spouse, your children, or your in-laws. If you do that, you'll never be a good Catholic, and it's far, far better to be a good something else than a lukewarm Catholic."

Too bad, or I'd go stand in a Playboy centerfold.

I read it in the newspaper. I was having hard chills with my temp and when they told me they were going to pack me in ice, I said, "No way. I would rather just go ahead and die." Of course, they paid no attention to me.

The bodyguard is an EMT.

Still waiting for an answer to my questions.... Originally Posted by Ron Cusano In the example you sited here, the Pastor was 100% correct. Within the church, a women is not to exert authority over the man. Just as Christ is the head of the Church, a man is the head of the household and is responsible for teaching, among other things. So....you're saying that for the more than 50 years this woman taught, her church elders, various pastors, etc were ALL in error? And for all that time, they were misinterpreting the scriptures, yes? How is that possible, since the dogma of the church did NOT change during that time. And still remains unchanged in most Baptist churches across America. How do you KNOW this one scripture should be taken "literally", but many others (like the one that says women must cover their heads to pray) need NOT be? How, exactly, is that distinction "clear" to you?

I think he means as opposed to Fundamentalists. I have a friend who belongs to a very, very conservative Southern Baptist congregation. Nonetheless, a group of her fellow church members broke away and started their own "non-denominational" church because they thought the Baptists were too liberal. Everything is relative to something else.

Did you know that coffee is lethal to slugs? And the grounds are good for your plants, too.

NO, NO, NO, TOM.....it's not the brand of salt, it's HOW you sprinkle it. I have used both generic and name brand salt for years on my lawn and have had absolutely no problem with either elephants or alligators. But I am careful to ALWAYS sprinkle it by the light of a full moon, wearing a pink tutu.

A command that my church takes "literally", so I guess you see "clear indication" that it should not be....never mind that the Catholic Church is about 2000 years older than you, with a staggering accumulation of history and knowledge at its disposal. Anglicans also believe in the transubstantiation, as does the Orthodox church.

If you have a temp like that, you aren't going to get better without some serious anti-biotic treatment - usually via IV. A nurse would HAVE to know that. I once spiked a temp of 105 1/2 and was going into convulsions. Fortunately, my DH came home and found me, and took me to the ER. I was sooooooo out of it. They packed me in ice (actually, it's a blanket that ice water circulates thru) and made me stay in the hospital for 3 days.

I saw the same Larry King interview. What puzzles me is that she had an EMT (her bodyguard) AND an RN with her round the clock. The nurse was trying to cool her down because she spiked a temp of 105 degrees. What medical professional does NOT take measures to get emergency treatment for a temp of 105 in an adult? She should have called 911, regardless of what Anna or Howard wanted. It was a matter of professional responsibility, if you ask me.

So....you're saying that for the more than 50 years this woman taught, her church elders, various pastors, etc were ALL in error? And for all that time, they were misinterpreting the scriptures, yes? How is that possible, since the dogma of the church did NOT change during that time. And still remains unchanged in most Baptist churches across America. How do you KNOW this one scripture should be taken "literally", but many others (like the one that says women must cover their heads to pray) need NOT be? How, exactly, is that distinction "clear" to you?

And therein lies a huge part of the problem, Ron. Evidently only you are wise enough, educated enough, or blessed enough to discern what is "clear indication" and what isn't. And the rest of us are just plain WRONG...according to you. This Baptist Church evidently had a similar problem. For over half a century they failed to apply a literal interpretation to one of the Bible's many commands regarding women. The "clear indication" was a long time coming, in this case. Aug. 21, 2006 — After 54 years of classes, a New York Sunday school teacher is getting an unexpected lesson in theology: She lost her job because of her sex. Mary Lambert, 81, has been a member of the First Baptist Church in Watertown, N.Y., for 60 years. She had her wedding on the premises, raised her kids in its halls and taught Sunday school at First Baptist for more than five decades. But she recently received a letter from the church board notifying her that the board had voted unanimously to dismiss her from her post. The letter referred to her sex as one of the reasons for her dismissal, quoting the Bible's First Epistle to Timothy, which states: "I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she is to keep silent." "I was absolutely astonished," Lambert said. As were others in her community, including Watertown mayor Jeff Graham, who said it's "fundamentally wrong" to go after a woman teaching Sunday school and use a passage from the Bible as your rationale. But the church's pastor stands by his decision. "I believe that God has a very special role for men and women within the church setting and many people look at it as exclusionary, but I don't view at it that way," Tim LaBouf, First Baptist's pastor, said. LaBouf added Lambert's sex was only one reason she was fired, and that "Christian courtesy" prevents him from saying any more than that. Decision Ignites Debate Shortly after the decision was made, news sources contacted LaBouf and he realized the board's decision was being questioned outside of church circles. "I am fully aware that not everyone ascribes to my view of the Scriptures, but I would never vilify them for having a different religious view, and I would hope that if you do hold a different view that you would extend to me the same courtesy," LaBouf wrote in a statement posted on his church's Web site. LaBouf is a member of the Watertown City Council, and his opinion is getting more scrutiny, as the council employees a female city manager.

And you don't think Ron precipitated any of that unpleasantness? He told everyone who disagreed with him that we were going to hell. He called anyone who has divorced and remarried (except for adultery) an adulterer. Ron is not the fat kid in third grade. He is an adult. No one was "picking on him". We made a lot of jokes and some of them may have been at Ron's expense, but at least they were obvious and genuine attempts at humor. Ron's style is to take cheap shots at anyone who does not embrace his version of scripture. He is not a missionary....he is a horrible reminder of how NOT to spread the good news of the Lord.

Susan... The criticism was regarding the practice of targeting Jews, as a group, for conversion. That's not the same thing as "spreading the Gospel".