I have always wondered the circumstances under which children have had 1 on 1 time with offenders. I was just reading about Camp Kanakuk in Missouri. One man molested 57 children over a 15 year period. Camp is still open and still run by the same man.
I think that people across all denominations have a willful ignorance about who perpetuates abuse. Predators are excellent at grooming and they try to gain a parent’s trust to get access to children. I don’t think we have to live in fear, but I absolutely agree with the “you made me judge you”. When an older man continually seeks out my children to tease them in the fellowship you’ll bet I will be right there behind them, and no, I’m not going to assume that he is harmless. Statistics are quite clear about who are victims (a shocking 1 in 4 boy and 1 in 5 girls) and who perpetrates (known adults who’ve groomed their way into trusted positions).
Hear, hear! I'm convinced that most of these "progressive" clergyman don't even believe in God, and that the Gospel is a tedious unfortunate thing that requires them to manipulate to their ends. Children should be kept a state or country away from these people.
Rather than attempt to refute his Eminence’s solid analysis (confirmed in the “New American Bible” where the footnotes explain the term “homosexual” was translated from the Greek word “catamite,” a grown man who pays underage boys for sex and not two adult men or women committing to each other for life), the author instead chooses to jump to pedophilia, a practice his Eminence neither condones nor even mentions. It is a trope employed all too often by those who hold unsupportable opinions about LGBTQ+ people. Fortunately, people like the author belong to an ever shrinking segment of the population.
There are very many translations of the Bible. Yours, I can be sure without even a glance at it, is bullshit catering to a modernist readership. Jorge Bergoglio would love it I'm sure.
Do yourself a favor and burn it, then go buy the Douay Rheims translation, which does not feature footnotes intended to foster degeneracy.
Any real Catholic, indeed anyone with even a cursory understanding of history, with a modicum of common sense, knows that homosexuality is "intrinsically disordered". It is not a mortal sin to have such desires, but it is a very grave sin to actively engage in homosexual acts.
Jesus probably never mentioned homosexuality any more than he would have reminded his followers to drink water and get enough sleep. Because everyone understood without being told that same-sex intercourse and similar paraphilias were evil and abhorrent.
The translation of "catamite" as footnoted in your "Bible" is totally wrong. The opposite of the real meaning. The term refers to boys who were victims of adult pedophile males.
That translates one of the words, yes. The thing is, the passage that translation is found in also condemns the position of being the one, ahem, "penetrated".
In the ancient world, there was a stigma around being the one on "bottom" but not the one on "top". St. Paul was saying "both parts of this sexual act are evil in the sight of God."
If we read that passage the way you're suggesting we do, you're implicating that both sexual abusers AND sexual abuse victims are going to Hell. That's fairly problematic, for pretty obvious reasons.
There really is a Lavender Mafia, isn't there? And the priority is never the protection of children, but the protection of access to children. (See john's comments.)
Although not morbidly obese from gluttony, Hollerich bears the other mark so often seen on those bishops and cardinals who are debased and degenerate -- that face the color of rare roast beef, the result not of sunshine but a steady stream of the finest Burgundy. From the perspective of this angry and scandalized Roman Catholic anyway.
Agreed.
I have always wondered the circumstances under which children have had 1 on 1 time with offenders. I was just reading about Camp Kanakuk in Missouri. One man molested 57 children over a 15 year period. Camp is still open and still run by the same man.
I think that people across all denominations have a willful ignorance about who perpetuates abuse. Predators are excellent at grooming and they try to gain a parent’s trust to get access to children. I don’t think we have to live in fear, but I absolutely agree with the “you made me judge you”. When an older man continually seeks out my children to tease them in the fellowship you’ll bet I will be right there behind them, and no, I’m not going to assume that he is harmless. Statistics are quite clear about who are victims (a shocking 1 in 4 boy and 1 in 5 girls) and who perpetrates (known adults who’ve groomed their way into trusted positions).
And I hope you do understand the orientation of the adult has nothing to do with whether or not he or she is a pedophile.
I hope you understand, john, how your comment makes you untrustworthy
Hear, hear! I'm convinced that most of these "progressive" clergyman don't even believe in God, and that the Gospel is a tedious unfortunate thing that requires them to manipulate to their ends. Children should be kept a state or country away from these people.
Rather than attempt to refute his Eminence’s solid analysis (confirmed in the “New American Bible” where the footnotes explain the term “homosexual” was translated from the Greek word “catamite,” a grown man who pays underage boys for sex and not two adult men or women committing to each other for life), the author instead chooses to jump to pedophilia, a practice his Eminence neither condones nor even mentions. It is a trope employed all too often by those who hold unsupportable opinions about LGBTQ+ people. Fortunately, people like the author belong to an ever shrinking segment of the population.
There are very many translations of the Bible. Yours, I can be sure without even a glance at it, is bullshit catering to a modernist readership. Jorge Bergoglio would love it I'm sure.
Do yourself a favor and burn it, then go buy the Douay Rheims translation, which does not feature footnotes intended to foster degeneracy.
Any real Catholic, indeed anyone with even a cursory understanding of history, with a modicum of common sense, knows that homosexuality is "intrinsically disordered". It is not a mortal sin to have such desires, but it is a very grave sin to actively engage in homosexual acts.
Jesus probably never mentioned homosexuality any more than he would have reminded his followers to drink water and get enough sleep. Because everyone understood without being told that same-sex intercourse and similar paraphilias were evil and abhorrent.
The translation of "catamite" as footnoted in your "Bible" is totally wrong. The opposite of the real meaning. The term refers to boys who were victims of adult pedophile males.
Should you be leading a group of children anywhere, I will be there to urge parents not to send theirs with you.
You made me judge you.
That translates one of the words, yes. The thing is, the passage that translation is found in also condemns the position of being the one, ahem, "penetrated".
In the ancient world, there was a stigma around being the one on "bottom" but not the one on "top". St. Paul was saying "both parts of this sexual act are evil in the sight of God."
If we read that passage the way you're suggesting we do, you're implicating that both sexual abusers AND sexual abuse victims are going to Hell. That's fairly problematic, for pretty obvious reasons.
Who are you responding to here? Who is "you" in "If we read that passage the way you're suggesting we do... "
Sorry, it's not clear to me.
The original comment at the top of the thread by john. Sorry for the confusion.
There really is a Lavender Mafia, isn't there? And the priority is never the protection of children, but the protection of access to children. (See john's comments.)
Although not morbidly obese from gluttony, Hollerich bears the other mark so often seen on those bishops and cardinals who are debased and degenerate -- that face the color of rare roast beef, the result not of sunshine but a steady stream of the finest Burgundy. From the perspective of this angry and scandalized Roman Catholic anyway.
His physiognomy certainly doesn't bely his doctrine, let's put it that way
😂