Ecclesiastical kindergarten games

Poor Spong has been wrong for so long ...

He denounces institutional religion but still insists on calling himself "Bishop" -- why so?

Because it allows the Left to cite a 'religious" critic of -- institutional religion!

Look, paganism has existed since time immemorial. If you don't like the Catholic Church, say so. To each his own. But why are the gays, the feminists, the GLBTQ crowd, the Marxist Left -- why are they all so hung up on the Church? Why not just ignore it?

Could it be fear, that perhaps Christ **will** come again to judge the living and the dead?

Spong obviously has issues with God, not the Church.

Too bad he doesn't believe in Confession. It's good for all of us.

Pope Benedict offers asylum to disaffected Anglicans. I just don't know how this could be viewed other than a latter day Mariel Boatlift when Castro allowed Cubans to go to the United States and we later discovered that the exiles had been released from Cuban jails and mental health facilities. Welcome to the Asylum, here you will truly belong, you have found spiritual your home. God bless you all.

It is amazing to read the liberal cliches about sexuality posted here. If you feel that homosexuality is perfectly moral, normal, natural and ethical, that is your right to believe that. But why do so many of you insist on forcing the Christian tradition to agree with you through superficial, ignorant, or fallacious arguments? The fact is that for millennia, all the major world religions have taken issue with homosexual behavior, and for the Christian tradition this stance is well grounded in sacred scriptures, theological reflection, and historic practice. You may think it is wrong, indeed, horribly so. So be it. But, please, stop pretending that Spong and other liberal renegades in any way represent the historic Christian tradition. Have the intellectual integrity to at least understand the position you so vehemently disagree with.

Price,

You write "the Angels are winning." Judaism isn't very big on angels, and when I was heavily into it, I subscribed, essentially, to the most rational, normative variety, closer to Maimonides than most were then and are now.

You may not believe this, but if there are angels, I very much hope they are winning. I hope that for you, for me, for your children, for my daughter, for all people, their children, and their children's children, forever.

Price,

Oh, for God's sake. Just use google.

You think I'm thrilled when I read that some rabbis have done something hideous?

Someone said, "The truth shall set you free."

I've thought about those words all my life. I think that he was probably right. But it is a long process.

You're wrong. Period. You don't Catholic canon law nor do you understand canonical language/procedures, you lack basic reasoning skills, you hate Catholics and your ignorance is willed. Yep, the document--as well as logic, history and law speak for themselves.

Throw in the fact you're an insult monger, a bearer of false witness and the Angels are winning, and I'm going to leave you to marinate in your unearned self-regard. You desperately, feverishly need to have the last word, so I'll let you have that small victory.

Price,

Use google for the memo, which is self-explanatory, but which you cannot decipher. You will then find endless articles in Catholic journals that reference it.

Again, Catholic children are your children. They are also Cardinal Levada's children, although he apparently doesn't know that.

You struck out a long, long time ago, Price, since the Middle Ages, when this horror began. And you are striking out again tonight.

Read what your fellow Catholics have written about this memo, other papal documents, going back fifty years.

Strike out all you want fella, but let your kids win.

Btw., I'm not a guy.

Price,

I also hate child abuse among Imams and Hindu priests. You name child abusers, and I will have the same hatred for what they have done.

What distinguishes the RCC is its centralization, its mode of administration. To the best of my knowledge, there is no equivalent administrative structure among other religious groups. It is that which has placed Catholic children at greater risk.

If a rabbi or imam molests a child, he will be arrested, not subject to in house adjudication.

PEDOPHILES AND THOSE WHO SHIELD THEM IN THE US BELONG IN JAIL.

Yes, the deep, dark obstructive conspiracy published on the Vatican's website for all to see.

http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/doc_dis_index.htm

If you won't understand the difference between canonical proceedings and civil/criminal proceedings under secular law, then enjoy your willed ignorance.

Let's put it this way, champ--if your interpretation was correct, then every bishop deposed during the rape-abuse lawsuits since 2001 should have refused, citing this document. But, they didn't.

The Survivors Network for Those Abused by Priests, which is intensely critical of the current pope's record, doesn't even mention the document:

http://www.snapnetwork.org/Papal%20visit%202008/040808_benedicts_record_on_sexual_abuse.html

Which they would, if it were a smoking gun. But it isn't.

Strike 3.

Price,

I'm not a "self-appointed brainiac" and I do not hate Catholics. I hate child abuse, whether by Catholic priests, rabbis, ministers, or lay persons.

Hate it, Price, hate it.

Price,

No, I am not wrong. Quite simply, the letter reads as Catholics all over the United States read it. It keeps the matter of investigation under "pontifical" wraps. Period.

Now, one of us does have reading problems, and that one is you. You can deny, hedge all you want. I capitalized for you, since your decoding skills may be limited.

If I have time later, I will post a bibliography of journals that read the letter as I have. Never did Benedict explain. His meaning was clear. The entirety of Catholic America that read this letter understood him.

Only you do not. Or else, you wish not to. If you'd like, I'll go over it now with you paragraph by paragraph until we hit the SECRET line.

Let me repeat: Pedophiles, priestly or other, are, according to US law to be surrendered to law enforcement.

If you need my help in going over each paragraph, let me know.

Otherwise, I assume that other Christians reading this thread, those who have read the pope's full memo, those who have looked into Levada, now get it. I also suspect that many now reading were familiar with this memo, have been for a long time.

In fact, it was a Catholic who blogs at OnFaith, CCNL1, who called our attention to it. From his post, some of us went on to investigate. We found scores of Catholics outraged (Catholics who, unlike you, were not afraid of the truth).

It was while I was looking into this that I discovered Cardinal Levada, other popes' statements on pedophile priests, eg. Pope John XXIII. As I said earlier, we are talking, for the most part, about Catholic children. Your children, Price.

Oh, geez, let me answer for you--there isn't.

It's pretty simple, unless you're a self-appointed brainiac who hates Catholics:

The document--which would have been trumpetted to the heavens had it said what you want it to upon Ratzinger's election--simply says the CDF has jurisdiction over *canonical trials* of rapist priests. It also sets the statutes of limitations for same.

It says nothing--as in zip, zilch, nada--about refusing to cooperate with the authorities. Which would be a remarkably stupid policy, given that the document was freely available to the frigging world in the first place.

Yes, one of us has reading comprehension issues--not to mention a hate-on for the religious observances of others.

That would be you.

You can cut and paste huge sections of text. You haven't established that you can *understand* it, but we'll get to that.

It's simple--*Which section tells them never to report cases of abuse to civil authorities?*

Price...?

Am I to take your silence as an admission of error? (Not necessarily "smart-alecky")

Having dispensed with the Benedict business re the US law that all pedophiles must be surrendered to law enforcement, re obstruction of justice provisions, can we move on to your thoughts on pedophile-ring shielding Cardinal Levada, obstructor of justice, he who is now in charge of pedophile priest issues world-wide? That would be Cardinal Levada, summoned to Rome by Benedict to do that work? Levada, to whom disaffected Anglicans will now apply?

I'll be checking back for your post.

Price,

Sorry, got tired of waiting. Strike three and your out. Read, and move on to Levada, please, and my other questions. (Thanks.)

"-A delict against morals, namely: the delict committed by a cleric against the Sixth Commandment of the Decalogue with a minor below the age of 18 years.

Only these delicts, which are indicated above with their definition, are reserved to the apostolic tribunal of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.

As often as an ordinary or hierarch has at least probable knowledge of a reserved delict, after he has carried out the preliminary investigation he is to indicate it to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, which unless it calls the case to itself because of special circumstances of things, after transmitting appropriate norms, orders the ordinary or hierarch to proceed ahead through his own tribunal. The right of appealing against a sentence of the first instance, whether on the part of the party or the party's legal representative, or on the part of the promoter of justice, solely remains valid only to the supreme tribunal of this congregation.

It must be noted that the criminal action on delicts reserved to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith is extinguished by a prescription of 10 years.(11) The prescription runs according to the universal and common law;(12) however, in the delict perpetrated with a minor by a cleric, the prescription begins to run from the day when the minor has completed the 18th year of age.

In tribunals established by ordinaries or hierarchs, the functions of judge, promoter of justice, notary and legal representative can validly be performed for these cases only by priests. When the trial in the tribunal is finished in any fashion, all the acts of the case are to be transmitted ex officio as soon as possible to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.

All tribunals of the Latin church and the Eastern Catholic churches are bound to observe the canons on delicts and penalties, and also on the penal process of both codes respectively, together with the special norms which are transmitted by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith for an individual case and which are to be executed entirely.

CASES OF THIS KIND ARE TO SUBJECT TO THE PONTIFICAL SECRET.

Through this letter, sent by mandate of the supreme pontiff to all the bishops of the Catholic Church, to superiors general of clerical religious institutes of pontifical right and clerical societies of apostolic life of pontifical right, and to other interested ordinaries and hierarchs, it is hoped not only that more grave delicts will be entirely avoided, but especially that ordinaries and hierarchs have solicitous pastoral care to look after the holiness of the clergy and the faithful even through necessary sanctions."

Price,

On the assertions: Quote my relevant post.

Price,

Deal. Which assertions do you wish me to back up?

Mansouri:

Strike two!

Do stay focused, my excitable table-thumping, subject-changing fellow. The issue isn't my alleged insanity/immorality and other assumptions which inflate your unwarranted sense of moral superiority. [Actually, I support life sentences, and, in my capital punishment supporting moments, the death penalty in all cases involving child rape. But that's neither here nor there, especially given Anthony Kennedy's sensibilities.] I'll address other subjects once you manage to quote the section of the document you claim supports your assertions. If it says what you claim it does (instead of what you were told it did), then it should be pretty easy to put me in my place.

The windup and the pitch...

Price,

Another thing: Speaking of smart Jews, where were all the Catholic district attorneys while priests were raping girls and boys?

And, just who was it, over the greatest imaginable resistance, insisted that pedophile priests were pedophiles and must be turned over to law enforcement?

Btw., why are some still merely retired, rather than brought to trial? I mean just exactly how does that work?
------------------------------
Since I'm not a Christian, I could easily say that if the Catholics, or for that matter, the Christians simply want to rape their children, they should go right ahead. After all, by your reasoning, its not my issue.

HOwever, unlike you, I'm not morally insane. Also, I'm a taxpayer. Just as all nonCatholic American citizens are. Is there some reason why we should not consider Catholic children to be worthy of protection?

"Bishop Spong is a good headline grabber, but basically checked out of mainstream Christianity decades ago. "

I'm sure the good bishop doesn't need permission from anyone to offer his views on this subject. In this case, it's a well informed, considered opinion, as is his usual practice. And, not surprisingly, given his life of scholarship and pastoral care, he hits the nail right on the head. That is precisely why those whose prejudices he so regularly exposes respond with ad hominems.

It's particularly critical in discussing this raw power grabbing venture by Rome that we do not confuse misogony and homophobia with the Christian religion. While clearly there have always been misanthropic views among the faithful (most of the arguments for slavery before the civil war were made from southern pulpits), such views are inconsistent with the second Great Commandment, to love our neighbors as ourselves. To paraphrase Einstein, it is impossible to simultaneously love your neighbor as yourself and practice discrimination based in raw human prejudices. And that is true no matter how cleverly those prejudices are wrapped in the legitimation of selective use of scripture or church teachings.

Price,

I'm not a Jewish guy, smart-alecky and/or liberal Jewish.

As I suspected, you find some way to squirm out of the issue. The document, which as a Catholic, willfully blind, however, you should have long known is infamous.

It specifies precisely how pedophile priests should be handled, and, what does one find?

Your remarks on Cardinal Levada? As I suspected, you would find some way to ignore the fact that he protected the largest pedophile priest ring at that point known in the Americas: the Salesians. He obstructed justice and attempted to destroy a whistle-blower priest. THE ONLY ONE.

Levada, before, he destroyed the San Francisco archdiocese, bankrupted that of Portland. Why? Shielding pedophile priests. Obstructing justice.

WHY isn't he in jail, instead of at the Vatican, taking applications from disaffected Anglicans?

Why is he now in charge of pedophile priests issues world wide?

AND, just who was it that summoned Levada?
WHY ISN'T HE IN JAIL?

BENEDICT: In the US, where I live, pedophiles and pedophile rings are to be turned over to law enforcement, not handled quietly, over tea, perhaps, as an inhouse matter, whether that house is the Church or anywhere else.

Priests rape Catholic children. Not Jewish children, unless they happen upon them outside of church, of course.

Shame on you. The victims of Benedict's policies, your Catholic brothers and sisters, may well be reading this thread.

You are not a "smart-alecky" Catholic. You are simply an immoral Catholic.

Mansouri:

As I suspected--you can't show where the document tells the bishops not to turn pedophiles over to law enforcement. Because it doesn't.

And no, being a smart-alecky self-identified liberal Jewish guy who can't stand Catholicism doesn't vest you with special insights into Roman juridical documents.

I mean, if it said what you imagine--or perhaps fantasize is more accurate--it says, it would be a bombshell used by prosecutors and plaintiffs from coast to coast. But it hasn't been, because it isn't, too-clever Catholic-hating guy.

Your concession is accepted.

"And opposed to them, is a faction which seeks to welcome gay people, and undo centuries of injustice."
----------------------------------
Spong is concerned with justice. JUSTICE, which is not the equivalent of love. Justice contains love. Without justice, there is no love, as we see right here, on this thread.

Why is it that so many Christians for two thousand years have failed to see this? The Christians say they have superceded Judaism. They have not, of course, since Judaism, like the Christianities, has continued to develop, pluralize for the past two thousand years.

More odd, is the failure of the Christianities to know anything about the religion they have (not) superceded, merely in its formative stages in the first century. By that point, however, in its beginnings, JUSTICE was its sine qua non, its foundation.
-----------------------
Christianity is not alone among those religions having difficulty dealing with gays. Islam has yet to do so. Ditto, Hinduism. In Judaism, there are denominations that still cannot come to terms with it. However, the Reformed, many Conservative, and all Reconstructionist branches have.

Gayness is a fact of life, just like heterosexuality. This persecution and exclusion of gays is UNJUST, irrational, ungodly, evil. It is sexual obsession, frankly. It is perverse.

The emergence of gay people as an accepted and respectable segment of society, and as a normal part of humanity, is not just giving the Anglican Church a hard time; it is giving ALL churches a hard, especially the Catholic Church.

In every church, there is a faction of "uninformed homophobia" as Rev. Spong has put it. In every church, there is a confused factions which lacks the ethical, theological, and intellectual capacity to deal with the emergence of gay people as a fact of life in the real world.

And opposed to them, is a faction which seeks to welcome gay people, and undo centuries of injustice. This great struggle, in which neither side is willing or able to compromise, will probably be the final death struggle of Christianity, as each denomination looses alot of membership, and the remaining members formally separate.

It is ironic that Christianity should fragment and destroy itself over something that is almost not mentioned at all in the Bible, and which is no big deal.

It's so wonderful to see the Pharisees and Sadducees commenting here about Bishop Spong and his theology.
---------------------
Neither Pharisees nor Sadducees are commenting here, since both died out thousands of years ago.

The Pharisees, of blessed memory, wrote the Talmud. Should even one Christian, Jew, or Muslim, attain the level of one Pharisee, the world, I suspect would be a significantly better place.

Price,

Indicate the precise lines in the memo that you cannot comprehend. Also, indicate what it is about the article posted below that escapes your understanding, which you do not mention. State your opinion on Levada and famous whistle-blower priest case, his protection of pedophile priests in Portland, resulting in the bankrupting of the Archdiocese.

State the last time you took a reading comprehension test, the name of the test, raw score, decile, and percentage.

State the amount of education you completed, diplomas or degrees earned.

Indicate whether any health or other sort of problem renders you incapable of simple decoding.

It's so wonderful to see the Pharisees and Sadducees commenting here about Bishop Spong and his theology. Bishop Spong is certainly used to the likes of them -- as all are. In just a short paragraph he was able to tell the whole story about the papist takeover of Anglicanism. It's fabulous how Spong does it and simultaneously riles up the sniffy little queens holding their red wine and brie. It's so wonderful More power to you, Bishop Spong. Let 'em have it with both barrels.

I am so, so, so tired of the ignorant press always turning to John Shelby Spong for commentary on church issues. Bishop Spong is a good headline grabber, but basically checked out of mainstream Christianity decades ago. It's the height of hypocrisy for one who denies the basic tenets of the church's faith -- the Apostles' Creed, the authority of Scripture, etc. -- to have continued as a diocesan bishop till retirement age, drawing a salary for going through the motions of rituals which he ridiculed in his books, and now drawing a pension from the same church, while styling himself a "courageous," "prophetic" critic of the church.

If you were all that courageous, John, you would have resigned, ceasing to cause scandal to the faithful, and taking your chances honestly earning your living at some other trade. Shame on you.

Rev Spong's comments have demonstrated why the Episcopal Church has fractured and why some former members leave to join the Catholic Church or more conservative Anglican communities.

I would argue the Episcopal Church has lost its unity, and its flock, not because of "kindergarden games" between ArchBishop Williams and Pope Benedict XVI, but because of the Episcopal Church's retreat from the core beliefs embodied in the Nicean Creed (summarized from the Bible and Tradition). When a denomination ceases to stand for anything, it stands for nothing, beyond the wishy-washy feel-good platitudes.

It has been said the Anglican Church was built upon a three legged stool - supported by Scripture, Tradition and Reason. Clerics such as Rev Spong have been actively sawing away at all three legs, and it should come as no surprise, it is collapsing.

For Spong to call anybody else unimpressive, uninformed, embarrassing or irrelevant is — apart from being supremely uncharitable — actually quite hilarious.

Bishop Spong made his whole living as a bishop in a Christian church trashing and reviling traditional Christian beliefs. If he is so sure of himself, he should have formally separated a long time ago and done his own thing. He couldn't seem to do it though. I think his whole project lacks integrity and is deeply hypocritical.

Mansouri:

Quote the exact section of the 2001 letter that you assert tells the American bishops to "keep it quiet."

Also, state all of your legal training that helps you to interpret Roman canonical documents.

If you are talking about the statute of limitations described in the letter, then explain why you are *not* in favor of the lifting of all statutes of limitation, civil and criminal, in *all* cases and against all possible defendants involving rape/sexual abuse.

Very soon, this daughter of the babylonian mystery religion will be set aside for good upon the return of our savior Jesus Christ and His establishing the Kingdom of God here on earth and a return to the true way to worship Him that was sidetracked in earnest at the time of Constantine (who had a hand in the necessity for Rev. 12:9 to be inspired, written and true to this very day....RC and Anglicans and all else involved with the RC 'church'. That is, confusion).

Here's a possible unintended consequence of the Pope's decision. Since currently around one in seven Episcopalians are former Roman Catholics, there's clearly a certain attraction that more than a few RC's have to Anglicanism. What's to stop the Episcopal Church from doing something along the lines of this new RCC policy. That is, have former RC priests who have been received into the Anglican Communion lead a RC style liturgy for disgruntled former RC's. It may be a kindergarten game but it sounds like a great marketing plan to me. I'd bet that it would clear a path for a flood of RC's into Episcopal churches.

Bishop,

Someone is reported to have said, "The truth will set you free." I suspect you will be free.

There is a midrash in which the followers of Akiva say to him: "May you be comforted by the footsteps of the messenger." May you be comforted.

Farnaz

Athelstane,

"Farnaz1Mansouri1 says: "Ratzinger, well, he knew that pedophile priests in the US were to be turned over to law enforcement, yet directed the American bishops otherwise."

That is a flat out lie.

Then-Cardinal Ratzinger did no such thing."
----------------------------
This post and the one are Levada are for you. You quote from the post on which I provide the link to Ratzinger's memo, but then say it is a lie. It is his memo, has been widely published.

Calling something a lie does not falsify the truth. Here again is a link to the site on which Cardinal Ratzinger's memo directing silence on the matter of pedophile priests. There are other documents on the matter at the same site.

A great, great deal has been published regarding Ratzinger on this matter. Hard to understand how you could either avoid or deny it.

http://www.opusbonosacerdotii.org/ad_exsequendam_ecclesiasticam_legem.htm

athelstane

"Farnaz1Mansouri1 says: "Ratzinger, well, he knew that pedophile priests in the US were to be turned over to law enforcement, yet directed the American bishops otherwise."

That is a flat out lie."

Then-Cardinal Ratzinger did no such thing."
-----------------------------
Yes, he very much did. I a link to one of his memos below, and you will find other letters of interest to you at the same site. I will post the link, with my original post, momentarily. Scroll up.

First, I call your attention to now, Cardinal, Levada. Scroll down, and you will find my original posting on Levada. I repaste it here. There is a particularly distasteful case on which I will post later, one in which Levada, while Archbishop of San Francisco, put the breaks on a whistleblower priest, while shielding one who had molested young boys for years, actively impeding law enforcement.

Levada, because of his hiding of pedophiles in Portland, bankrupted the archdiocese. As a result of his service to the RCC and to God, Ratzinger has given him his current position, in which he not only takes applications from disaffected Anglicans but handles pedophilia among priests worldwide.
Levada should be in jail.
-----------------------------------------
"Salesians hold world record for pedophile priests -- guest writer Joey Piscitelli lists their names and connections to William Levada
*****
The Salesians go on trial in LA April 14. Plaintiffs say the Order let pedophile priest Titian Miani have access to children at St. John Bosco High in Bellflower. Piscitelli sued the Salesians in 2006. -- ke

By Joey Piscitelli
The Salesians Clergy of California have shattered the World Record for the most accused child molesters in one area, by a landslide. There is no religious order in the world that we know of that is even remotely close in the number of accused molesters. And the list is growing. At latest count, there are 21 local (California) Salesians accused and/or convicted pedophiles, 19 of them named as child molesters in lawsuits! This tally is so far off the charts.

The following Salesians have been accused of sex crimes in California, including abuse, molestation, rape, sodomy, lewd and lascivious conduct, felony child abuse, copulation, and sexual deviation: Fr. Larry Lorenzoni, Fr. Richard Presenti, Fr. Bernard Dabbenne, Fr. Steve Whelan, Bro. Sal Billante, Bro. Jesse Dominguez, Fr. Jim Miani, Fr. Harold Danielson, Bro. Mark Epperson, Fr. Mario Blanco, Bro. Anthony Juarez, Bro. Ernie Martinez, Fr. Emanual Palayo, Fr. Juan Sanchez, Bro. John Verhart, Fr. Fleming, Fr. Al Mengon, Bro. John Vas, Bro. Ralph Murguia, Bro. Dan Pacheco, and Mr. Sam Vitone.

Cardinal William Levada shielded and covered for so many Salesian accused molesters that victims of the Salesians have nicknamed the Salesian pedophiles -"Levada’s Boys". Still, Levada has shown no shame or remorse, nor has he apologized."

Posted by: Farnaz1Mansouri1 | October 22, 2009 10:01 PM

It *is* remarkable to read comments like these from Bishop Spong: "[Williams] does not seem to be concerned that the Anglican Church in his country has lost the allegiance of fifty million people because of silly and dated activities like these."

Of course if those fifty million left, it was long before Williams ever become archbishop. So what activities does Spong mean? Can he really mean that the Anglican Communion has not been sufficiently progressive in recent decades to keep its membership rolls up?

That does seem to be exactly what he means: That if the A.C. had only been more, well, Spongian: transgressive in its reading of Scripture, denying of the supernatural nature of Christ, had aggressively moved to fully affirm homosexual behavior in all its clerical orders and marriage rites sooner, had moved to make women bishops even sooner, that many millions of people who stopped darkening Anglican church doors years ago would have done otherwise.

Not once does he consider those driven away by what radicalizations have taken place - the hundreds of priests who we know have left for Rome over these issues, and the many laypeople who we also know have left for Rome, Constantinople, or evangelical denominations. But then I'm sure Spong considers these no great loss: bigots, every one of them.

It would be interesting to see what a purely, assertively Spongian church looked like, and just how big it would be. But then I think it may already exist, and it is called ... the Unitarian-Universalist church.

Farnaz1Mansouri1 says: "Ratzinger, well, he knew that pedophile priests in the US were to be turned over to law enforcement, yet directed the American bishops otherwise."

That is a flat out lie.

Then-Cardinal Ratzinger did no such thing.

"Salesians hold the world record for pedophile priests."

I wouldn't be so sure of that. A report, issued by the CHRISTIAN SCIENCE MONITOR, notes that most "religious" sex-abuse allegations in the US were directed at Protestant Clergy. Orthodox Jewish congregations have had their share too. But the "world record" is held by families. 85% of all abusers are family members, according to the report.

Sadly, the worst contemporary abuse going on today is in Gaza and Palestine, where hundreds of thousands of innocent women and children are being abused and reviled by the Jewish Israeli soldiers. As the Turkish government recently pointed out, Jewish Israeli soldiers shot innocent women and children in the last conflict there. That real abuse under a "religious tent."

William

BREAKING -- NEWS: Good Riddence:

"OSAMA BIN LADINS GRAVE WAS FOUND 10 minutes AGO"

More Details coming soon.

Note: OSAMA BID LADEN really really Died of Kidney Failure around June 2007. The Hash and the Opium stopped helping him. So he also died a Drug Addict!

Roomer also has it that He Matyred himself to meetup with 72 Cloudy looking wingy thingy Virgins and with two other friends, as he cowardly Blew-up his own dieing Body, to many peaces, as his family watched, from a distance, and then, the Poshtune roomer goes, that his

wives/Kids/worshipers/congregants/followers saved his Hide/skin and Bones for Souveniers and or place his remains in Entrances of Caves.

Eeeeeeeeeeee Haaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!

Amazing, NO GRACE! n NO-Class!

Thank you, Bishop Spong, for your article.

It's the first honest and forthright piece of writing I've seen on this topic.

Mr. Spong,

While I've disagreed with you on many issues, I've found you to be a basically human being with a good mind, exceptional among the Christians. ARe you sure you are in the right group? The Anglicans are moving to Rome.

If you must have Christ, consider, Unitarianism. They don't care much for idols. You seem to have a similar distaste.

"For that reason it matters little to me or to most of the world that they continue to play their ecclesiastical kindergarten games. I am quite simply not interested in this debate."

Untruer words were never spoken. *Sure* you don't care, John. I mean, *everyone* cranks out 400 words about something they could care less about, flinging the schoolyard insults all the while.

Don't worry, though--I have every confidence you'll be called for comment when the Episcopalians consecrate a Playstation as Bishop. Then you can wax flatulent about how the "truly enlightened" jettisoned such "obsolete" notions as "organicentrism" *ages* ago...

Rev. Spong's complaints are merely a new act in the two thousand year run of The Theatre of the Absurd.

The greatest irony is the string of corpses that extends from Northern Europe to the Americas, over such theological niceities, in the name of the Prince of Peace.

Bishop,

If you do email the Pope, you can safely say that Jews don't like clerics who hide pedophiles. Even less do they like clerical pedophiles.

One day, we'll probably find a couple of our own. In my neck of the Jewish woods (Mizrahi), he'd make it out of the synagogue alive, but he'd never make it anywhere else that way.

Mr. Spong, the Pope won't believe you, but you fire off a brief email to him (with sources) gently pointing out that the world is not flat.

The best fruit would be for Levada to be in jail, and he's not alone. Ratzinger, well, he knew that pedophile priests in the US were to be turned over to law enforcement, yet directed the American bishops otherwise.

I don't know what's up with the Anglicans. They've ever been a few steps away from idolatry themselves, have been dribbling in to the Roman sink for awhile.

Yunno, something's real rotten around some parts.

Meanwhile, the Catholics pray for "the Jews." LOL. I've developed my own prayer for them.

Will post it. All are welcome to it.

This essay is quite funny and sad. Bishop Spong considers the Pope and the Archbishop of Canterbury "two unimpressive Christian leaders, rooted deeply in yesterday" as opposed perhaps to Spong's own impressiveness as the inventor of an entirely fresh, new, and contemporary religion with no resemblance to Christian orthodoxy. There was a time in my life when I struggled with faith and was involved in sin, and at that time I appreciated Spong's books, he promoted a version of "Christianity" that was stripped of anything supernatural and renounced traditional sexual morality. I kept learning and growing and I began to pray regularly and to read some of the great Saints, Augustine, John of the Cross, etc, to encounter the Bible more deeply, to see the great BEAUTY of orthodox Christianity and real virtue, and I realized the extreme poverty of what Spong was selling, and that he was just frankly colossally wrong and arrogant and has harmed a lot of souls and contributed to the fracturing of the Episcopal Church. May the movement toward Christian unity represented in the faithful desires of many Anglicans to enter full communion with the Catholic Church, bear much good fruit in repairing the wounds and damage.

Before Benedict 16 was Pope, he was "in charge" of dealing with the pedophile priest horror. He wrote an infamous letter to American bishops telling them, in effect, to keep it quiet. There had been other memos, from popes, before him, concerning hush money payment, silence, etc.

Here is the link for Ratzinger's letter:

http://www.opusbonosacerdotii.org/ad_exsequendam_ecclesiasticam_legem.htm

Speaking of homophobia and pederasty, Roman-wise, it may interest you to know, Bishop, that the current Vatican doctrinal bulldog, he who is holding out the welcome mat for disaffected Anglicans, is no other than Cardinal William Levada, formerly Archbishop of San Francisco, where he led a march of 1,000 Catholics in a demonstration against gay marriage. At the same time, the Archbishop was shielding one of the largest, though not the largest, Catholic clerical pedophile rings in the United States.

For his good work, he was brought to the Vatican. He should be in jail.
-------------------------------
"Salesians hold world record for pedophile priests -- guest writer Joey Piscitelli lists their names and connections to William Levada
*****
The Salesians go on trial in LA April 14. Plaintiffs say the Order let pedophile priest Titian Miani have access to children at St. John Bosco High in Bellflower. Piscitelli sued the Salesians in 2006. -- ke

By Joey Piscitelli
The Salesians Clergy of California have shattered the World Record for the most accused child molesters in one area, by a landslide. There is no religious order in the world that we know of that is even remotely close in the number of accused molesters. And the list is growing. At latest count, there are 21 local (California) Salesians accused and/or convicted pedophiles, 19 of them named as child molesters in lawsuits! This tally is so far off the charts.

The following Salesians have been accused of sex crimes in California, including abuse, molestation, rape, sodomy, lewd and lascivious conduct, felony child abuse, copulation, and sexual deviation: Fr. Larry Lorenzoni, Fr. Richard Presenti, Fr. Bernard Dabbenne, Fr. Steve Whelan, Bro. Sal Billante, Bro. Jesse Dominguez, Fr. Jim Miani, Fr. Harold Danielson, Bro. Mark Epperson, Fr. Mario Blanco, Bro. Anthony Juarez, Bro. Ernie Martinez, Fr. Emanual Palayo, Fr. Juan Sanchez, Bro. John Verhart, Fr. Fleming, Fr. Al Mengon, Bro. John Vas, Bro. Ralph Murguia, Bro. Dan Pacheco, and Mr. Sam Vitone.

Cardinal William Levada shielded and covered for so many Salesian accused molesters that victims of the Salesians have nicknamed the Salesian pedophiles -"Levada’s Boys". Still, Levada has shown no shame or remorse, nor has he apologized."

A-holes will be A-holes, Bishop. They can survive for two thousand years on their own delusions, spread their cults, alternatively nauseating, deadly, and boring.

I find it interesting that Bishop Spong has decided to throw away the teachings of Jesus Christ that he doesn't agree with, and to throw away most of the Epistles of the New Testament because he has a new vision for the Church. He has special enmity for those who believe in traditional Christian values and cannot accept his new revelations. II Timothy 3 talks about men who will come and tickle the ears of men to tell them what they want to hear. Rev. Spong clearly has a feather ready.

This is an amazing article. Bishop Spong could easily be characterized as one of the people that drove the fissure in the Anglican Communion, with his support of Gay and women ordinations and ultimately his declaration that Jesus was not physically resurrected. He advocates a new theology that is foreign to the Apostolic Christian faith so it is no wonder that he has no use for this dialog or for Pope Benedict, who is clearly orthodox in his teachings of the Faith. In fact, he is one of the men in the Anglican communion that drove the conservative members to request this opportunity from Rome. So, like it or not, Bishop Spong was a big contributor to making this happen.

Sorry for this MIS-POSTING. MY BAD !

This is amusing!

For someone who has low or no regard for the 2 church leaders, the author has a lot more information than an average church member.

RECOMMENDATION to the AUTHOR: Don't waste your time and energy on church issues which you consider irrelevant like this one. Let these churches do their own business. If you are not an Anglican, a Catholic, a homosexual or a woman, why is this affecting you?

You see, if you are not any of the above, you should not be in this discussion. Please help us understand.

Thank for reading.

This is amusing!

For someone who has low or no regard for the 2 church leaders, the author has a lot more information than an average church member.

RECOMMENDATION to the AUTHOR: Don't waste your time and energy on church issues which you consider irrelevant like this one. Let these churches do their own business. If you are not an Anglican, a Catholic, a homosexual or a woman, why is this affecting you?

You see, if you are not any of the above, you should not be in this discussion. Please help us understand.

Thank for reading.