No one should find this surprising. The Catholic Church is one of the most conservative institutions on the planet, and conservatism is by it's very nature, backward facing, intolerant, and stagnating. I grew up in the Catholic Church and certainly never found it to be especially loving. Conservative Catholics are some of the most intolerant and mean-spirited people you will ever meet.
It isn't that they're necessarily worse, but they are every bit as bad. My dad went to his grave believing you absolutely could not question anything the church taught. Needless to say, we had nothing in common.
Yup. Same was true for my mother. I got tossed out of the family home 53 years ago for doing something minor: getting medical care on my own for a medical condition that had been denied and neglected for four years. I was labeled an "evil whore" for taking low-dose birth control pills that alleviated the condition.
I stopped that sort of nonsense from my dad twice--once at 13 and once at 35. I finally saw him for what he was--bigger than me, meaner than me, more willing to use his fists--but overall just a shrunken old man. In short, a bully who could no longer back up his threats with anything except more threats. After that showdown, we got on tolerably well. After he was finally diagnosed with PTSD in the 90s, and got therapy and medical care, things actually got better. It's that tolerable dad, not the bully, that I miss today.
My ex had some 'female stuff' that could have been treated with birth control pills. She wouldn't go that route, regardless that she was late 40s and wasn't going to have more kids. Catholic.
I remember, when growing up, hearing multiple sermons at church, and multiple lessons at catechism about the evils of any sort of birth control. And my mom had a mouth on her, when it came to any sort of birth control, abortion, repro rights, etc. After all, *she* had had ten pregnancies, a couple of which almost killed her, so every good girl should be either a Catholic Martyr Mother of Many--or a nun. Believe me, "evil whore" was one of the nicest terms applied to any woman who, er, wasn't one of those two.
Admittance Officer: Let's see, your applying for this school. Wow, You have a 4.0 GPA, a 1500 on the SAT, and it looks like you have been involved with several school sports and community organizations. Quiet impressive, but there is one last thing we need to check.
Student: What is that?
Admittance Officer **puts on latex gloves.**: Drop your drawers. And jump up into the official college entrance stir-ups there. We have to do a thorough and invasive inspection of your vagina to make sure it is a real vagina.
Student: WHAT?!
Admittance Officer: Look I am not going to take any pleasure in this. But I am going to have to thoroughly inspect that cooch of yours. It's for your own good. It's to protect you from those evil so called trans men.
Student: HOW?!
Admittance Officer: If potential students don't allow me to do a detailed spelunking of their love caves, I might accidently let in a biological male into the school. And then when your in Chemistry 101, you might be sitting in the same room as a penis. And not even know it. How bad would that be? I don't like this any more than your. How about this. I'll turn on some Barry White and dim the lights to relax you, while you take you last college entrance exam.
I doubt they worry about natural breasts. Too many women identified as female at birth have silicone in their chests. But yeah the vagina thing is apparently a big deal. I wonder how they deal with trans men. They never seem to factor into the discussion.
It might seem paradoxical but they'll be very comfortable rejecting transgender men. All trans men are to them is spoiled fruits--damaged goods with no worth or value, unhealthy and diseased. They don't see them as women because they don't even really see them as human anymore, at least not subconsciously. They're happy to throw them on the burn pile, for failing to obey their expected "role" as beautiful compliant baby incubators. It's the same reason that one particularly hateful author called transgender men and boys "irreversibly damaged." 🤢
But they "love" us, it's just everything about us that they hate. If they were to treat us as human beings, they'd be condoning us condemning our souls to Hell, and they "love" us too much to do that.
Unbaptized babies were sent to Limbo because they were far too young to make the decision for themselves. So now that Limbo is no more, what happens to those unbaptized babies?
God is Landru, apparently, a computer that has to have every thing done precisely and literally. Intentions mean nothing, honest mistakes mean nothing, if you don't cross every t and dot every i, it doesn't count.
One thing doesn't annihilate the concept as a whole. For instance wearing shoes doesn't annihilate the concept of nature. Fighting diseases... nope, concept of nature still around. Somebody needs to work on how to brain better.
But can trans-women be blessed? Sure the Catholic church has been lobbying for the removal of rights for the trans-community, just like they have been lobbying against the LGBT community, but the really question is is the pope going to allow local priest to do superficial blessing ceremonies?
Stuff like that seems like small change to us, but I think it's reflective of the fact that the Catholic Church really hasn't thought through the whole issue of LGBTQ+ acceptance and its implications on church doctrine. Pope Frankie seems quite happy to dismiss Leviticus altogether as regards our community, but there are considerable elements of those under him who aren't as willing to be progressive, not at all.
And I see that as being a considerable bone of contention down the road.
Church doctrine, schoctrine. We should ask the more important theological question..... What are the implications of the acceptance of the LBGTQ+ community on the bottom line?
Ah, the bottom line. That's something I haven't heard much about and an investigation into what's going on with Church finances in the 21st century would be most enlightening. Doubtless, attendance at mass is down, just like it is with other churches, and very likely tithing income is down along with it. Add that to the numerous lawsuits being levied against the RCC all over the place, and I am reasonably sure that things are not at all hunky or dory with Vatican City finances.
Well, I'm disappointed, but not surprised. It's the Catholic two-step: One step forward, one step back, repeat for thousands of years. The back-and-forth trudging has worn a hole so deep that they can't even see over the edge.
In Hemant's previous article about this a couple of weeks ago, my first thought was "Countdown to cave-in: 10, 9, 8, 7..."
But instead, my comment was encouraging and defiant, suggesting that even if Bishop Backward followed through with his threat to withdraw their "Catholic" status, the college would be better off without that tarnished brand anyway.
Sadly, it looks like the brand is still too precious to them to EVER actually abandon it in favor of doing the right thing. Ever, ever.
"...we believe that the College should continually grapple with the complexity of living our Catholic values in a changing world. But we also believe the College needs to do so as a community. When we disagree, we must strive to preserve the fabric of our relationships..."
In World War II, convoys of Allied ships traversed the Atlantic in perilous voyages countless times. The entire convoy had to go no faster than the slowest ship, or it wouldn't remain a convoy. Sadly again, Saint Mary's has decided that to remain a "community," they can only change as fast as their most intractable bigots. That's not even a slow "voyage," that's being permanently moored. That's not a "community," that's a bunch of people living their whole lives in an ancient cemetery and never leaving.
So the "changing world" is going to keep on changing, and rapidly, and Saint Mary's brief moment of courage and enlightenment will soon be forgotten as it is re-absorbed into the caustic Blob known as the RCC. My reaction to future incidents of Catholic institutions attempting to break out of their bonds of bigotry will be "Yeah, right."
It's a textbook case for the influence of conservatism/money on institutions like this. This isn't the only case where people have threatened or implied that they would stop donating money because they disagree with the political stance of a University. Mind you, I find it difficult to understand the concept of private universities anyway, (we don't have them) but they certainly seem more susceptible to blackmail because of their funding structure.
Considering the December 19th FA article about Papa blessing same-sex marriages and reading about this college that reversed course on trans women, I came across the following this morning that also was published 3 days ago:
"Opinion: Can the Church of England's and Pope Francis' strides on same-sex marriages help save dying religious institutions?"
All my rowdy friends are here. I have no time to deal with the delusional up close and personal (unless I can get a chance to goad the worst if them and leave them sputtering).
I have very kkkatliker family that call occasionally. I will call the most vocal of them on xmas eve and ruin his family's holiday. I already destroyed the diocese office by wishing a stillborn geezus of hatred.
Wow. What we have here, I think, is a case of the left hand of the Catholic Church not knowing (or much caring) about what the right hand is doing. On one side you have the initial intent of St. Mary's College, in concert with the recent statements of Pope Frankie, being welcoming at at least attempting to be inclusive in admitting trans women to their school. On the other side, you have Bishop Rhoades and the reactionaries of the RCC, who don't want ANYTHING to change, ESPECIALLY not anything having to do with the LGBTQ+ community, and they are quite willing to be punitive in the extreme to get their way.
There's a further note here: people talk about the possibility of a schism in the RCC when, in fact, IT'S ALREADY HERE! The above is clear evidence of a considerable disagreement between the policies espoused by Pope Frankie and the attitudes of those under him. I have to ask: why hasn't Frankie corrected this? If the Catholic Church is supposed to be uniform in it's dogma and doctrines, why aren't the likes of Rhoades and his associates being brought into line, forcibly if necessary? Seems to me that Frankie has recently stripped one high-ranking member of the hierarchy of his authority, though perhaps for other reasons. Why no action here (yet)?
I think that question is important, too, because if there isn't any regulation of practices under the aegis of Roman Catholicism, that schism could fester and grow into something far more serious ... and I don't think Frankie would like the consequences of that.
I sometimes wonder if the only thing stopping the schism from turning into a full-blown split is the fact that it's been done already, centuries ago, and the bishops and cardinals who would lead the breakaway faction are scared that if they go through with it, everyone else will call them what they already are... the word their lips dare not speak: 𝘗𝘳𝘰𝘵𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘯𝘵𝘴.
They're worse than simple cowards. They are cowards who hide behind authority they have not earned and a organizational structure designed to maintain the status quo at all costs. All of this based on a "holy book" which is so badly flawed that it should be disqualified from any consideration of being a reference for morals or decent behavior.
But they'll cling to all of that, because without it, they have exactly NOTHING.
Well, fortunately, they got guidance from the perfect and unfailing god to make the right decision.
And then, when that proved unpopular, they got guidance from the perfect and unfailing god to make the exact opposite but equally right decision.
. . .
It's almost as if they floated an idea they thought might work, and walked it back when they were scared of the result, and there was no god involved at literally any step of the plan.
No one should find this surprising. The Catholic Church is one of the most conservative institutions on the planet, and conservatism is by it's very nature, backward facing, intolerant, and stagnating. I grew up in the Catholic Church and certainly never found it to be especially loving. Conservative Catholics are some of the most intolerant and mean-spirited people you will ever meet.
I don't have much experience with conservative Catholics, but I can't imagine they're worse than conservative Baptists.
It isn't that they're necessarily worse, but they are every bit as bad. My dad went to his grave believing you absolutely could not question anything the church taught. Needless to say, we had nothing in common.
Yup. Same was true for my mother. I got tossed out of the family home 53 years ago for doing something minor: getting medical care on my own for a medical condition that had been denied and neglected for four years. I was labeled an "evil whore" for taking low-dose birth control pills that alleviated the condition.
My dad laid into me and ate my ass out like I was ten years old, two days after I got back from Vietnam.
I stopped that sort of nonsense from my dad twice--once at 13 and once at 35. I finally saw him for what he was--bigger than me, meaner than me, more willing to use his fists--but overall just a shrunken old man. In short, a bully who could no longer back up his threats with anything except more threats. After that showdown, we got on tolerably well. After he was finally diagnosed with PTSD in the 90s, and got therapy and medical care, things actually got better. It's that tolerable dad, not the bully, that I miss today.
I don't believe in any kind of an afterlife, which is okay by me because I would never want to see my parents again.
I don't think that's the right expression for what you meant to convey.
My ex had some 'female stuff' that could have been treated with birth control pills. She wouldn't go that route, regardless that she was late 40s and wasn't going to have more kids. Catholic.
I remember, when growing up, hearing multiple sermons at church, and multiple lessons at catechism about the evils of any sort of birth control. And my mom had a mouth on her, when it came to any sort of birth control, abortion, repro rights, etc. After all, *she* had had ten pregnancies, a couple of which almost killed her, so every good girl should be either a Catholic Martyr Mother of Many--or a nun. Believe me, "evil whore" was one of the nicest terms applied to any woman who, er, wasn't one of those two.
A meeting between your mother and DM's grandmother would have been interesting.
I consider myself lucky. Mom's family never really cared about religion. Dad's family chose l a sect called (in Norwegian) Last seventh days saints.
Sounds like a (heh heh) cross between Latter Day Saints and 7th Day Adventists.
The last one I think. I don't have much contact with then anymore. All conversations ended up being extremely weird.
Ofdrumpster. She belong to a catholic sect where women must obey their husband all the time.
Sounds like the ideal Baptist wife.
Admittance Officer: Let's see, your applying for this school. Wow, You have a 4.0 GPA, a 1500 on the SAT, and it looks like you have been involved with several school sports and community organizations. Quiet impressive, but there is one last thing we need to check.
Student: What is that?
Admittance Officer **puts on latex gloves.**: Drop your drawers. And jump up into the official college entrance stir-ups there. We have to do a thorough and invasive inspection of your vagina to make sure it is a real vagina.
Student: WHAT?!
Admittance Officer: Look I am not going to take any pleasure in this. But I am going to have to thoroughly inspect that cooch of yours. It's for your own good. It's to protect you from those evil so called trans men.
Student: HOW?!
Admittance Officer: If potential students don't allow me to do a detailed spelunking of their love caves, I might accidently let in a biological male into the school. And then when your in Chemistry 101, you might be sitting in the same room as a penis. And not even know it. How bad would that be? I don't like this any more than your. How about this. I'll turn on some Barry White and dim the lights to relax you, while you take you last college entrance exam.
> It's to protect you from those evil so called trans men.
I like that you made the admittance officer get the terminology wrong.
Saint Mary's motto "We include all women who have natural breasts and a vagina". Verification at the nurse's office upon arrival.
My wife is a very real woman, but does not have natural breasts as she had breast cancer at the age of 36.
I doubt they worry about natural breasts. Too many women identified as female at birth have silicone in their chests. But yeah the vagina thing is apparently a big deal. I wonder how they deal with trans men. They never seem to factor into the discussion.
Ha! Was thinking the same. If my son showed up at their door, they’d take one look and show him back out that door “No men allowed”.
It might seem paradoxical but they'll be very comfortable rejecting transgender men. All trans men are to them is spoiled fruits--damaged goods with no worth or value, unhealthy and diseased. They don't see them as women because they don't even really see them as human anymore, at least not subconsciously. They're happy to throw them on the burn pile, for failing to obey their expected "role" as beautiful compliant baby incubators. It's the same reason that one particularly hateful author called transgender men and boys "irreversibly damaged." 🤢
Neville was gay and she should have admitted it. Such great stories from such a hateful woman.
Aaaaand 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳𝘦'𝘴 the other shoe!
Thanks, Catholicism- you never fail to disappoint.
And they'll know we are Christians by our hate.
But they "love" us, it's just everything about us that they hate. If they were to treat us as human beings, they'd be condoning us condemning our souls to Hell, and they "love" us too much to do that.
Jesus loves you, yet he'll still condemn you to eternal torment. And he doesn't care if you're a man, a woman or a child.
Apparently, he likes to do that to the babies who didn't have water sprinkled on them and a few magic words said correctly by a proper priest.
Unbaptized babies were sent to Limbo because they were far too young to make the decision for themselves. So now that Limbo is no more, what happens to those unbaptized babies?
They go to Kolob?
The LDS will retro baptize them as good little Mormons.
They leave limbo and get stoned at the village gates.
Always wondered who took care of babies in Limbo. Who fed them, changed them, etc. Were there adults in Limbo to do it? How did THEY get there?
Woo-woo always leaves more questions than it answers.
God is Landru, apparently, a computer that has to have every thing done precisely and literally. Intentions mean nothing, honest mistakes mean nothing, if you don't cross every t and dot every i, it doesn't count.
And remember what happened to Landru after Kirk & Co. got finished with him. As a result, "The Body" was liberated.
In the same time, why giving a computer the name of a conman and serial killer ?
geezus says "i love you now go to hell."
“annihilate the concept of nature”
One thing doesn't annihilate the concept as a whole. For instance wearing shoes doesn't annihilate the concept of nature. Fighting diseases... nope, concept of nature still around. Somebody needs to work on how to brain better.
If Frankie could do that, he wouldn't be Pope.
St. Mary’s picking at daisy petals: we love them, we love them not.....
But can trans-women be blessed? Sure the Catholic church has been lobbying for the removal of rights for the trans-community, just like they have been lobbying against the LGBT community, but the really question is is the pope going to allow local priest to do superficial blessing ceremonies?
Stuff like that seems like small change to us, but I think it's reflective of the fact that the Catholic Church really hasn't thought through the whole issue of LGBTQ+ acceptance and its implications on church doctrine. Pope Frankie seems quite happy to dismiss Leviticus altogether as regards our community, but there are considerable elements of those under him who aren't as willing to be progressive, not at all.
And I see that as being a considerable bone of contention down the road.
Church doctrine, schoctrine. We should ask the more important theological question..... What are the implications of the acceptance of the LBGTQ+ community on the bottom line?
Ah, the bottom line. That's something I haven't heard much about and an investigation into what's going on with Church finances in the 21st century would be most enlightening. Doubtless, attendance at mass is down, just like it is with other churches, and very likely tithing income is down along with it. Add that to the numerous lawsuits being levied against the RCC all over the place, and I am reasonably sure that things are not at all hunky or dory with Vatican City finances.
Still, I'd love to hear that formalized.
The artwork of the Sistine Chapel ought to be worth a few hundred million.
And they should be grateful to part with it, seeing that the guy who painted it was one THOSE people.
As Bob Smith said: Of course he was gay, would a straight man spend X years painting one room?
I saw something the other day about the kkkatlikers selling infants...
I found it.
https://themessenger.com/news/belgian-catholic-church-baby-scandal-adoptive-parents-unwed-mothers
Church Accused of Stealing Babies From Young Unwed Mothers, Selling Them to Married Couples
But "contributions were "voluntary." (nuidge nudge, wink wink
Well, I'm disappointed, but not surprised. It's the Catholic two-step: One step forward, one step back, repeat for thousands of years. The back-and-forth trudging has worn a hole so deep that they can't even see over the edge.
In Hemant's previous article about this a couple of weeks ago, my first thought was "Countdown to cave-in: 10, 9, 8, 7..."
But instead, my comment was encouraging and defiant, suggesting that even if Bishop Backward followed through with his threat to withdraw their "Catholic" status, the college would be better off without that tarnished brand anyway.
Sadly, it looks like the brand is still too precious to them to EVER actually abandon it in favor of doing the right thing. Ever, ever.
"...we believe that the College should continually grapple with the complexity of living our Catholic values in a changing world. But we also believe the College needs to do so as a community. When we disagree, we must strive to preserve the fabric of our relationships..."
In World War II, convoys of Allied ships traversed the Atlantic in perilous voyages countless times. The entire convoy had to go no faster than the slowest ship, or it wouldn't remain a convoy. Sadly again, Saint Mary's has decided that to remain a "community," they can only change as fast as their most intractable bigots. That's not even a slow "voyage," that's being permanently moored. That's not a "community," that's a bunch of people living their whole lives in an ancient cemetery and never leaving.
So the "changing world" is going to keep on changing, and rapidly, and Saint Mary's brief moment of courage and enlightenment will soon be forgotten as it is re-absorbed into the caustic Blob known as the RCC. My reaction to future incidents of Catholic institutions attempting to break out of their bonds of bigotry will be "Yeah, right."
It's a textbook case for the influence of conservatism/money on institutions like this. This isn't the only case where people have threatened or implied that they would stop donating money because they disagree with the political stance of a University. Mind you, I find it difficult to understand the concept of private universities anyway, (we don't have them) but they certainly seem more susceptible to blackmail because of their funding structure.
Somebody had to do it:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IjYqRZy3PY0
Is that a young Steve McQueen?
Yes.
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0051418/?ref_=fn_al_tt_2
Ka-chow!
His first starring role.
“ It's the Catholic two-step: One step forward, one step back, repeat for thousands of years.”
That’s hilarious.
No dancing!, you heretics! -SBC
Considering the December 19th FA article about Papa blessing same-sex marriages and reading about this college that reversed course on trans women, I came across the following this morning that also was published 3 days ago:
"Opinion: Can the Church of England's and Pope Francis' strides on same-sex marriages help save dying religious institutions?"
https://www.latimes.com/opinion/story/2023-12-19/church-of-england-catholics-pope-francis-gay-marriage
Seeing St. Mary's boneheaded decision, the answer should be obvious. Christian institutions seem to be doing all they can to destroy themselves.
The Anglicans are too busy trying to prevent a schism and Frankie, despite being the CEO, is hamstrung by the board to a vast degree.
As always, the laity are the true leaders and forward-thinkers.
Some of the laity, apparently many of the Anglicans in Africa agree with the Ugandan legislature on gay rights.
I was thinking mostly Catholic anyway.
IF anyone has xtian 'friends' it is time to call them on their hatred. If nobody misses me after I am dead it means nothing to me.
All my rowdy friends are here. I have no time to deal with the delusional up close and personal (unless I can get a chance to goad the worst if them and leave them sputtering).
I have very kkkatliker family that call occasionally. I will call the most vocal of them on xmas eve and ruin his family's holiday. I already destroyed the diocese office by wishing a stillborn geezus of hatred.
I see David Graf elsewhere on this thread decided that St. Mary's chose money.
As usual. he missed the target. What they truly chose was bigotry/hatred.
Hatred is their strongest suit since they kicked out geezus and welcomed paul along with his henchman, leviticus. HATE sells better than love.
"Sin is the cudgel used by religious superstition to pound hatred in to its followers' hearts." Author unknown
Even Jesus himself was written to have told people that they must hate their families and even their own lives to be his followers.
Wow. What we have here, I think, is a case of the left hand of the Catholic Church not knowing (or much caring) about what the right hand is doing. On one side you have the initial intent of St. Mary's College, in concert with the recent statements of Pope Frankie, being welcoming at at least attempting to be inclusive in admitting trans women to their school. On the other side, you have Bishop Rhoades and the reactionaries of the RCC, who don't want ANYTHING to change, ESPECIALLY not anything having to do with the LGBTQ+ community, and they are quite willing to be punitive in the extreme to get their way.
There's a further note here: people talk about the possibility of a schism in the RCC when, in fact, IT'S ALREADY HERE! The above is clear evidence of a considerable disagreement between the policies espoused by Pope Frankie and the attitudes of those under him. I have to ask: why hasn't Frankie corrected this? If the Catholic Church is supposed to be uniform in it's dogma and doctrines, why aren't the likes of Rhoades and his associates being brought into line, forcibly if necessary? Seems to me that Frankie has recently stripped one high-ranking member of the hierarchy of his authority, though perhaps for other reasons. Why no action here (yet)?
I think that question is important, too, because if there isn't any regulation of practices under the aegis of Roman Catholicism, that schism could fester and grow into something far more serious ... and I don't think Frankie would like the consequences of that.
Not at all.
I sometimes wonder if the only thing stopping the schism from turning into a full-blown split is the fact that it's been done already, centuries ago, and the bishops and cardinals who would lead the breakaway faction are scared that if they go through with it, everyone else will call them what they already are... the word their lips dare not speak: 𝘗𝘳𝘰𝘵𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘯𝘵𝘴.
Many want the coven brought into line with rhoades.
Cowards.
They're worse than simple cowards. They are cowards who hide behind authority they have not earned and a organizational structure designed to maintain the status quo at all costs. All of this based on a "holy book" which is so badly flawed that it should be disqualified from any consideration of being a reference for morals or decent behavior.
But they'll cling to all of that, because without it, they have exactly NOTHING.
geezus freaks following their hatred anywhere it leads.
OT - New names for Nazi Moms, Minivan Taliban, and Assholes With Casseroles.
Klanned Karenhood.
Morons Against Libraries
I am kind of against this name but will bring it up anyways. Mom for threesums
Christian and Bridget Zeigheiler.
Mummies fumbled libertines.
Bitch Witch.
Well, fortunately, they got guidance from the perfect and unfailing god to make the right decision.
And then, when that proved unpopular, they got guidance from the perfect and unfailing god to make the exact opposite but equally right decision.
. . .
It's almost as if they floated an idea they thought might work, and walked it back when they were scared of the result, and there was no god involved at literally any step of the plan.
Strange, that.
Sorry about the interruption, now back to the regularly scheduled programming.
OT Mitch McConnell wins most disliked Senator or Congressman:
https://news.yahoo.com/poll-reveals-americas-least-favorite-202153414.html
In Kentucky his approval rating is 94%.
Ted Cruz reportedly suffered a minor cardiac event after receiving the news that he 𝘸𝘢𝘴𝘯'𝘵 the most unlikable person in the building for a change.
Yeah, and he went right on Fox News to brag about it.
“All politics is local.”