weber wrote: This is not the greatest search engine Bryn, but it is what I have for now. I am looking for a better one. This is in my favorites/
http://www.gospelway.com/versref.htm#J What you are looking for is there.
OK thanks, whilst the KJV keeps changing its euphemisms the RSV appears to stick to Sodomites - that at least gives me a start.
I'll look.
The Debarring of homosexuals From the papacy:
The Debarring of homosexuals From the papacy:
Bryn Mawr:-6
The Bible does have statements about homsexuality but totally ignores the lesbian. It become a problem of literal interpretation and not recognizing the importance of context.
In Leviticus it says that it is an abomination for a man to lie with a man as with a woman. A few verses later it says it is an abomination to eat shell fish and then later on that it is an abomination for a person to wear clothing consisting of more than one fibre or fabric. I think you can see the problem. We eat shell fish and wear clothing of different fabrics all the time. So how is this to be taken?
The New Testament makes similar comments in only 2 or three places. However, we must again look at the context. Jesus healed a legionnares boy servant. Scholars have come to the conclusion that this was in fact a homosexual relationship which was quite acceptable in that Roman period. Jesus was not the least bit concerned about that.
Further Jesus made no comment about homosexuality whatsoever. For him it was not an issue even though 10% of the population was and is of an alternative sexual orientation.
Then we must consider the context of the era. The Hebrews were very concerned about acquiring a larger population. The Christions had the same problem and concern.
Then we come to our context and our level of understanding of issues. The American Psychological Assn. and the North American Medical establishment have concluded that homosexuality is not a choice but a given, a part of their very being or ontology. They do not consider it a disease or abnormal. It is being seen as simply another expression of human sexuality and love. As we no longer consider epilepsy as resulting from demon posession so we no longer accept or believe that homosexuality is somehow evil or the result of demon possession.
It has become an issue of recognizing that valid love can exist and be demonstrated between all folks in one way or another. God does not condemn a committed loving relationship between two committed people. What He does condemn is promiscuity which is an whole other topic.
I hope this helps. If I can supply more info. just ask.
Shalom
Ted:-6
The Bible does have statements about homsexuality but totally ignores the lesbian. It become a problem of literal interpretation and not recognizing the importance of context.
In Leviticus it says that it is an abomination for a man to lie with a man as with a woman. A few verses later it says it is an abomination to eat shell fish and then later on that it is an abomination for a person to wear clothing consisting of more than one fibre or fabric. I think you can see the problem. We eat shell fish and wear clothing of different fabrics all the time. So how is this to be taken?
The New Testament makes similar comments in only 2 or three places. However, we must again look at the context. Jesus healed a legionnares boy servant. Scholars have come to the conclusion that this was in fact a homosexual relationship which was quite acceptable in that Roman period. Jesus was not the least bit concerned about that.
Further Jesus made no comment about homosexuality whatsoever. For him it was not an issue even though 10% of the population was and is of an alternative sexual orientation.
Then we must consider the context of the era. The Hebrews were very concerned about acquiring a larger population. The Christions had the same problem and concern.
Then we come to our context and our level of understanding of issues. The American Psychological Assn. and the North American Medical establishment have concluded that homosexuality is not a choice but a given, a part of their very being or ontology. They do not consider it a disease or abnormal. It is being seen as simply another expression of human sexuality and love. As we no longer consider epilepsy as resulting from demon posession so we no longer accept or believe that homosexuality is somehow evil or the result of demon possession.
It has become an issue of recognizing that valid love can exist and be demonstrated between all folks in one way or another. God does not condemn a committed loving relationship between two committed people. What He does condemn is promiscuity which is an whole other topic.
I hope this helps. If I can supply more info. just ask.
Shalom
Ted:-6
The Debarring of homosexuals From the papacy:
Bryn Mawr:-6
You may find the following site helpful.
http://www.torreys.org/bible/
Resource Pages for Biblical Studies, main page
There are two basic approaches to the Christian faith. One is the traditionalis, fundamentalist, literalist approach. The second is a more open approach that makes use of history, science, archaeology, reason, tradition and common sense. There are many resource books on both. Thus it is a matter of reading and making a choice.
Shalom
Ted:-6
You may find the following site helpful.
http://www.torreys.org/bible/
Resource Pages for Biblical Studies, main page
There are two basic approaches to the Christian faith. One is the traditionalis, fundamentalist, literalist approach. The second is a more open approach that makes use of history, science, archaeology, reason, tradition and common sense. There are many resource books on both. Thus it is a matter of reading and making a choice.
Shalom
Ted:-6
The Debarring of homosexuals From the papacy:
Bryn Mawr wrote: OK thanks, whilst the KJV keeps changing its euphemisms the RSV appears to stick to Sodomites - that at least gives me a start.
I'll look.
Honestly Bryn
can you talk with less words that I have to look up or ignore:-1
I'll look.
Honestly Bryn
can you talk with less words that I have to look up or ignore:-1
miriam:yh_flower
Making the simple complicated is commonplace; making the complicated simple, awesomely simple, that's creativity.
.................Charles Mingus
http://www.gratefulness.org/candles/enter.cfm?
Making the simple complicated is commonplace; making the complicated simple, awesomely simple, that's creativity.
.................Charles Mingus
http://www.gratefulness.org/candles/enter.cfm?
The Debarring of homosexuals From the papacy:
Ted wrote:
The New Testament makes similar comments in only 2 or three places. However,
Further Jesus made no comment about homosexuality whatsoever. For him it was not an issue even though 10% of the population was and is of an alternative sexual orientation.
I was quite surprised that, from the list supplied by Weber, the New Testament examples appeared to be confined to the letters.
Any idea why the church fathers should take against it when Jesus appears to pass no judgement?
The New Testament makes similar comments in only 2 or three places. However,
Further Jesus made no comment about homosexuality whatsoever. For him it was not an issue even though 10% of the population was and is of an alternative sexual orientation.
I was quite surprised that, from the list supplied by Weber, the New Testament examples appeared to be confined to the letters.
Any idea why the church fathers should take against it when Jesus appears to pass no judgement?
The Debarring of homosexuals From the papacy:
William Ess wrote: Not really but in an emotive business such as the Church, it would be surprising if the Pope did not have strong views on certain issues - private agenda, if you wish - and in the final analysis the facility of Papal Infallibility even if not used explicitly must carry some weight in terms of dampening opposition.
I am not sure I could come to accept the doctrine of Papal Infallibility if push came to shove but it must be a very effective tool in terms of maintaining discipline amongst the Bishops and Cardinals.I still don't follow your reasoning here. How could something that is used so seldom be such an 'effective tool'? I'm not so much arguing with you as trying to understand your train of thought. Could you give an example of what you mean? In doing so, please don't forget that the pope's authority is not self-bestowed. He is pope because he was the choice of the Church hierarchy, the very leaders that you seem to suspect míght be lacking in 'discipline'.
I am not sure I could come to accept the doctrine of Papal Infallibility if push came to shove but it must be a very effective tool in terms of maintaining discipline amongst the Bishops and Cardinals.I still don't follow your reasoning here. How could something that is used so seldom be such an 'effective tool'? I'm not so much arguing with you as trying to understand your train of thought. Could you give an example of what you mean? In doing so, please don't forget that the pope's authority is not self-bestowed. He is pope because he was the choice of the Church hierarchy, the very leaders that you seem to suspect míght be lacking in 'discipline'.
The Debarring of homosexuals From the papacy:
Ted wrote: I have one question just for clarification. Are there any lay people involved in such decisions?In which decisions? Defining doctrine? I don't think so, certainly not directly, because such decisions have more to do with the interpretation of the history of the Church's previous teaching on the subject than with popular opinion.
As I have said before, here and elsewhere, when my Church becomes 'trendy' I will begin looking for a new affiliation.
As I have said before, here and elsewhere, when my Church becomes 'trendy' I will begin looking for a new affiliation.
-
William Ess
- Posts: 339
- Joined: Mon Aug 28, 2006 5:15 am
The Debarring of homosexuals From the papacy:
Ted wrote: Bryn Mawr:-6
For him it was not an issue even though 10% of the population was and is of an alternative sexual orientation.
Keep to facts. The figure is 1% - and that was produced by a census organised by the Stonewall group.
Shalom
Ted:-6
Don't invent facts. The figure is 1% - and that was produced by a census organised by the Stonewall group.
For him it was not an issue even though 10% of the population was and is of an alternative sexual orientation.
Keep to facts. The figure is 1% - and that was produced by a census organised by the Stonewall group.
Shalom
Ted:-6
Don't invent facts. The figure is 1% - and that was produced by a census organised by the Stonewall group.
-
William Ess
- Posts: 339
- Joined: Mon Aug 28, 2006 5:15 am
The Debarring of homosexuals From the papacy:
Ted wrote: Bryn Mawr:-6
In Leviticus it says that it is an abomination for a man to lie with a man as with a woman. A few verses later it says it is an abomination to eat shell fish and then later on that it is an abomination for a person to wear clothing consisting of more than one fibre or fabric.
The thing is, you have to look for the reason why, at that time, shellfish and mixed clothing were abominations.
In Leviticus it says that it is an abomination for a man to lie with a man as with a woman. A few verses later it says it is an abomination to eat shell fish and then later on that it is an abomination for a person to wear clothing consisting of more than one fibre or fabric.
The thing is, you have to look for the reason why, at that time, shellfish and mixed clothing were abominations.
The Debarring of homosexuals From the papacy:
William Ess wrote: The thing is, you have to look for the reason why, at that time, shellfish and mixed clothing were abominations.
Being homosexual can't be a sin. God created us all unique. And they are unique too. We just don't like their unique. And them shellfish and mixed clothing are unique too.
Being homosexual can't be a sin. God created us all unique. And they are unique too. We just don't like their unique. And them shellfish and mixed clothing are unique too.
miriam:yh_flower
Making the simple complicated is commonplace; making the complicated simple, awesomely simple, that's creativity.
.................Charles Mingus
http://www.gratefulness.org/candles/enter.cfm?
Making the simple complicated is commonplace; making the complicated simple, awesomely simple, that's creativity.
.................Charles Mingus
http://www.gratefulness.org/candles/enter.cfm?
The Debarring of homosexuals From the papacy:
William:-6
Those are not invented facts. They are listed in scientific documents from several sources including the American Psychological Assn.
http://www.apa.org/topics/orientation.html
Answers to Your Questions About Sexual Orientation and Homosexuality
This is an older source of statistics.
http://www.indiana.edu/~kinsey/research ... osexuality
The Kinsey Institute - Kinsey Study Data [Research Program]
I have also read some reports of scientific enquiry that list the figure as 15%. There are all kinds of sites that can give one the figures. A "Stonewall" group! Perhaps the name itself is significant.
Shalom
Ted:-6
Those are not invented facts. They are listed in scientific documents from several sources including the American Psychological Assn.
http://www.apa.org/topics/orientation.html
Answers to Your Questions About Sexual Orientation and Homosexuality
This is an older source of statistics.
http://www.indiana.edu/~kinsey/research ... osexuality
The Kinsey Institute - Kinsey Study Data [Research Program]
I have also read some reports of scientific enquiry that list the figure as 15%. There are all kinds of sites that can give one the figures. A "Stonewall" group! Perhaps the name itself is significant.
Shalom
Ted:-6
The Debarring of homosexuals From the papacy:
William:-6
If homosexuality is an abomination than the Bible clearly shows that eating shell fish and wearing of clothing of more than one fibre or fabric is an abomination. You can look aor all the reasons in the world including why they thought homosexuality was an abomination.
Shalom
Ted:-6
If homosexuality is an abomination than the Bible clearly shows that eating shell fish and wearing of clothing of more than one fibre or fabric is an abomination. You can look aor all the reasons in the world including why they thought homosexuality was an abomination.
Shalom
Ted:-6
The Debarring of homosexuals From the papacy:
Bryn Mawr:-6
There is some speculation among some of the scholars that perhaps Paul himslef of of the homosexual orientation. This he was not pleased with and would write against it in his own feelings of anger.
Why should the rest disapprove? I can only speculate. It could be seen as an attack on an individuals maleness and this would not go over well in a patriarchical society. They had a fear of the unknown. They took their lead from the Hebrew who were concerned about increasing their population. They did not understand the driving force behind it and the Bible said it was wrong. It is interesting however that later on they ignored the rule against eating shell fish and the wearing of clothing of multiple fabrics. They also ignored some other 650 rules that the Jewish folks had created.
Folks are wanting to argue that one cannot pick and choose from the Bible and yet it has been going on for thousands of years. In fact Jesus himself egnored many of the rules and regulations because he thought them ridiculous.It is also intereting that the Bible makes very little comment on lesbianism. It would seem it is OK for the women but not the men. This of course could also relate to the patriarchal society. Let's not forget that four centuries men used to argue over whether women were in fact fully human.
The Bible was also wrong on the three tiered universe.
You also have a God who says that murder is wrong but then goes on in Num 31 to apparently condone and encourage war crimes and genocide. This same God also says not to covet and then promply gives an already occupied country to another group as if those living there had no rights whatsoever but only deserved to be murdered.
Shalom
Ted:-6
There is some speculation among some of the scholars that perhaps Paul himslef of of the homosexual orientation. This he was not pleased with and would write against it in his own feelings of anger.
Why should the rest disapprove? I can only speculate. It could be seen as an attack on an individuals maleness and this would not go over well in a patriarchical society. They had a fear of the unknown. They took their lead from the Hebrew who were concerned about increasing their population. They did not understand the driving force behind it and the Bible said it was wrong. It is interesting however that later on they ignored the rule against eating shell fish and the wearing of clothing of multiple fabrics. They also ignored some other 650 rules that the Jewish folks had created.
Folks are wanting to argue that one cannot pick and choose from the Bible and yet it has been going on for thousands of years. In fact Jesus himself egnored many of the rules and regulations because he thought them ridiculous.It is also intereting that the Bible makes very little comment on lesbianism. It would seem it is OK for the women but not the men. This of course could also relate to the patriarchal society. Let's not forget that four centuries men used to argue over whether women were in fact fully human.
The Bible was also wrong on the three tiered universe.
You also have a God who says that murder is wrong but then goes on in Num 31 to apparently condone and encourage war crimes and genocide. This same God also says not to covet and then promply gives an already occupied country to another group as if those living there had no rights whatsoever but only deserved to be murdered.
Shalom
Ted:-6
The Debarring of homosexuals From the papacy:
William:-6
Merck also gives the number of between 5-10%. I say about becaue it is broken down for male and female and by age group in both.
Further research confirmed statistics from as low as 1% to as high as 15%. I suspect that the actual number is somewhere around 8-10% because many are not being open about their sexual orientation for obvious reasons.
I am going to look ruther.
Shalom
Ted:-6
Merck also gives the number of between 5-10%. I say about becaue it is broken down for male and female and by age group in both.
Further research confirmed statistics from as low as 1% to as high as 15%. I suspect that the actual number is somewhere around 8-10% because many are not being open about their sexual orientation for obvious reasons.
I am going to look ruther.
Shalom
Ted:-6
The Debarring of homosexuals From the papacy:
When it comes down to it does the percentage really matter. What counts is the injustice done to even one person in the name of God or by homophobic citizens.
Shalom
Ted:-6
Shalom
Ted:-6
The Debarring of homosexuals From the papacy:
The following is an excellent site for presenting both sides of the homosexuality debate.
http://allpsych.com/journal/homosexuality.html
Homosexuality: Nature or Nurture in AllPsych Journal
With all of the research that I have done over the yers on the issue I cannot accept the social theorists position. It really has no scientific evidence to back it up.
My primary reason fo the research was and is that withing 10 months it will become an issue of debate at a special syod of the Anglican diocese. I am quite comforable with my research to vote in favour of the total incllusion of homosexuals within the Anglican church whether as a congregant or a bishop. Any thing less would continue the great injustices of the past. It is indeed time for the folks to get over it.
Shalom
Ted:-6
http://allpsych.com/journal/homosexuality.html
Homosexuality: Nature or Nurture in AllPsych Journal
With all of the research that I have done over the yers on the issue I cannot accept the social theorists position. It really has no scientific evidence to back it up.
My primary reason fo the research was and is that withing 10 months it will become an issue of debate at a special syod of the Anglican diocese. I am quite comforable with my research to vote in favour of the total incllusion of homosexuals within the Anglican church whether as a congregant or a bishop. Any thing less would continue the great injustices of the past. It is indeed time for the folks to get over it.
Shalom
Ted:-6
The Debarring of homosexuals From the papacy:
i can throw a crutch in this whole blasted arguement. why in the hell does eligion insist on a human being denying their feelings of desire and needs that they are born with. i have always thought it rediculous to deny priests the right to marry whomever they please, be it same sex or not. To deny a human quality in this way is perverted to me.
From what i understand the nunnery was originally formulated so abused women could enter for shelter to get out of a less than desirable marriage.
From what i understand the nunnery was originally formulated so abused women could enter for shelter to get out of a less than desirable marriage.
The Debarring of homosexuals From the papacy:
Ted wrote: The following is an excellent site for presenting both sides of the homosexuality debate.
http://allpsych.com/journal/homosexuality.html
Homosexuality: Nature or Nurture in AllPsych Journal
With all of the research that I have done over the yers on the issue I cannot accept the social theorists position. It really has no scientific evidence to back it up.
My primary reason fo the research was and is that withing 10 months it will become an issue of debate at a special syod of the Anglican diocese. I am quite comforable with my research to vote in favour of the total incllusion of homosexuals within the Anglican church whether as a congregant or a bishop. Any thing less would continue the great injustices of the past. It is indeed time for the folks to get over it.
Shalom
Ted:-6
to accept openly gay men into the bishophood is the first step to acknowleging that they are human and have sexual desires. for the most part, haven't the catholic society denied or pretended that the priest was asexual. looks to me like reality is fast catching up with an outdated fairytale.
http://allpsych.com/journal/homosexuality.html
Homosexuality: Nature or Nurture in AllPsych Journal
With all of the research that I have done over the yers on the issue I cannot accept the social theorists position. It really has no scientific evidence to back it up.
My primary reason fo the research was and is that withing 10 months it will become an issue of debate at a special syod of the Anglican diocese. I am quite comforable with my research to vote in favour of the total incllusion of homosexuals within the Anglican church whether as a congregant or a bishop. Any thing less would continue the great injustices of the past. It is indeed time for the folks to get over it.
Shalom
Ted:-6
to accept openly gay men into the bishophood is the first step to acknowleging that they are human and have sexual desires. for the most part, haven't the catholic society denied or pretended that the priest was asexual. looks to me like reality is fast catching up with an outdated fairytale.
The Debarring of homosexuals From the papacy:
guppy:-6
It is rather split up at the moment. Some churches are violently opposed to same sex lifestyle and activity. Some are completely open such as the United Church of Canada. Some are in between.
Within the Anglican communion there is some hot debate going on at this time. Some dioceses have no problem with the same sex issues. Some are violently opposed and some are quickly moving towards total inclusivity which of course is what we see in the life of Jesus. I stand with those dioceses that have no problem with the issue and give great credit to those who are now making that move.
I can only speak for the Christian church of course. I cannot speak for other faiths.
Shalom
Ted:-6
It is rather split up at the moment. Some churches are violently opposed to same sex lifestyle and activity. Some are completely open such as the United Church of Canada. Some are in between.
Within the Anglican communion there is some hot debate going on at this time. Some dioceses have no problem with the same sex issues. Some are violently opposed and some are quickly moving towards total inclusivity which of course is what we see in the life of Jesus. I stand with those dioceses that have no problem with the issue and give great credit to those who are now making that move.
I can only speak for the Christian church of course. I cannot speak for other faiths.
Shalom
Ted:-6
The Debarring of homosexuals From the papacy:
Ted wrote: guppy:-6
It is rather split up at the moment. Some churches are violently opposed to same sex lifestyle and activity. Some are completely open such as the United Church of Canada. Some are in between.
Within the Anglican communion there is some hot debate going on at this time. Some dioceses have no problem with the same sex issues. Some are violently opposed and some are quickly moving towards total inclusivity which of course is what we see in the life of Jesus. I stand with those dioceses that have no problem with the issue and give great credit to those who are now making that move.
I can only speak for the Christian church of course. I cannot speak for other faiths.
Shalom
Ted:-6
i am only speaking my opinion here Ted. We do not know for one hundred percent that Jesus did not have a wife.
It is rather split up at the moment. Some churches are violently opposed to same sex lifestyle and activity. Some are completely open such as the United Church of Canada. Some are in between.
Within the Anglican communion there is some hot debate going on at this time. Some dioceses have no problem with the same sex issues. Some are violently opposed and some are quickly moving towards total inclusivity which of course is what we see in the life of Jesus. I stand with those dioceses that have no problem with the issue and give great credit to those who are now making that move.
I can only speak for the Christian church of course. I cannot speak for other faiths.
Shalom
Ted:-6
i am only speaking my opinion here Ted. We do not know for one hundred percent that Jesus did not have a wife.
The Debarring of homosexuals From the papacy:
guppy:-6
Your last post ending with "fairy tale" is right on.
Yep that is happening. Unfortunately the Roman Catholic Church tried to cover up the scandal for years. The spent a great deal of time moving the accused priests around and not informing the appropriate authorities on the advice of then Cardinal Ratzinger.
Fortunately the truth could no longer be denied. In the meantime these mobile priests kept abusing children.
I am pleased that they now take it seriously and are making efforts to correct the situation.
Here in Canada the RC church continues to resist paying their fair share in the First Nations reparations issue and instead continue to spend millions on lawyers and will still ultimately have to pay up. What a waste of money. Are they still in denial?
Bronwen may take exception to this but it is a fact and cannot be denied.
Shalom
Ted:-6
Your last post ending with "fairy tale" is right on.
Yep that is happening. Unfortunately the Roman Catholic Church tried to cover up the scandal for years. The spent a great deal of time moving the accused priests around and not informing the appropriate authorities on the advice of then Cardinal Ratzinger.
Fortunately the truth could no longer be denied. In the meantime these mobile priests kept abusing children.
I am pleased that they now take it seriously and are making efforts to correct the situation.
Here in Canada the RC church continues to resist paying their fair share in the First Nations reparations issue and instead continue to spend millions on lawyers and will still ultimately have to pay up. What a waste of money. Are they still in denial?
Bronwen may take exception to this but it is a fact and cannot be denied.
Shalom
Ted:-6
The Debarring of homosexuals From the papacy:
guppy:-6
You are absolutely correct on the 100 % but in general good scholarship doubts very much that he was. But history is a very imperfect science.
Shalom
Ted:-6
You are absolutely correct on the 100 % but in general good scholarship doubts very much that he was. But history is a very imperfect science.
Shalom
Ted:-6
The Debarring of homosexuals From the papacy:
Ted:-6
My intentions are not to step on any toes here or anger anyone. i just think the strict rule that you pretend that a normal healthy human man does not sexual needs or desires is what brought about alot of the problems that are happening now. it is not the cause but it helped promote the atmosphere for perversion; which is excactly what happened.
with great sincereity and respect
guppy
My intentions are not to step on any toes here or anger anyone. i just think the strict rule that you pretend that a normal healthy human man does not sexual needs or desires is what brought about alot of the problems that are happening now. it is not the cause but it helped promote the atmosphere for perversion; which is excactly what happened.
with great sincereity and respect
guppy
The Debarring of homosexuals From the papacy:
all of history is biased to the opinions of the men who held power at the time the words are written. history is never completely correct nor absolutely incorrect. imho.
The Debarring of homosexuals From the papacy:
guppy:-6
On the First Nations, residential school issue while the church should not be expected to shoulder the whole weight of the error it must take upon itself its fair share. The government must also take its load of the respondibility.
The whole residential school idea was an abomination right from the word go. It did far more harm than it did any good.
This is not to say there weren't some fine people as staff in these schools from all of the churches. There were. Unfortunately there were some rotten apples in the barrel as well and like in most cases one rotten apple can spoil the whole barrel.
Shalom
Ted:-6
On the First Nations, residential school issue while the church should not be expected to shoulder the whole weight of the error it must take upon itself its fair share. The government must also take its load of the respondibility.
The whole residential school idea was an abomination right from the word go. It did far more harm than it did any good.
This is not to say there weren't some fine people as staff in these schools from all of the churches. There were. Unfortunately there were some rotten apples in the barrel as well and like in most cases one rotten apple can spoil the whole barrel.
Shalom
Ted:-6
The Debarring of homosexuals From the papacy:
guppy:-6
You certainly aren't stepping on my toes. By all means speak your mind. I do and sometimes it raises a little heat. I've probably raised some in my last few posts. That's life.
Shalom
Ted:-6
You certainly aren't stepping on my toes. By all means speak your mind. I do and sometimes it raises a little heat. I've probably raised some in my last few posts. That's life.
Shalom
Ted:-6
The Debarring of homosexuals From the papacy:
homosexualality is a whole diff ballgame from a pediphile. sheeesh. :-5
The Debarring of homosexuals From the papacy:
guppy:-6
Yep, but not if you listen to some folks. Some think that all homosexual people are pedophiles. That is a clear lack of knowledge of the research findings.
Shalom
Ted:-6
Yep, but not if you listen to some folks. Some think that all homosexual people are pedophiles. That is a clear lack of knowledge of the research findings.
Shalom
Ted:-6
The Debarring of homosexuals From the papacy:
Ted wrote: guppy:-6
Yep, but not if you listen to some folks. Some think that all homosexual people are pedophiles. That is a clear lack of knowledge of the research findings.
Shalom
Ted:-6
guppy version? it's called sticking your head in a hole and you butt up in the air, making a grand a-- out of yourself. (sorry ):o
Yep, but not if you listen to some folks. Some think that all homosexual people are pedophiles. That is a clear lack of knowledge of the research findings.
Shalom
Ted:-6
guppy version? it's called sticking your head in a hole and you butt up in the air, making a grand a-- out of yourself. (sorry ):o
The Debarring of homosexuals From the papacy:
LOL
Shalom
Ted:-6
Shalom
Ted:-6
The Debarring of homosexuals From the papacy:
Ted wrote: LOL
Shalom
Ted:-6
LOL!:-6
what does shalom stand for?
guppy
Shalom
Ted:-6
LOL!:-6
what does shalom stand for?
guppy
The Debarring of homosexuals From the papacy:
guppy:-6
BTW I too enjoyed our conversation the other night.
"Shalom" is a hebrew word used both in greeting and saying good bye. It means: peace, God's peace be with you, peace be unto you etc.
Shalom
Ted:-6
BTW I too enjoyed our conversation the other night.
"Shalom" is a hebrew word used both in greeting and saying good bye. It means: peace, God's peace be with you, peace be unto you etc.
Shalom
Ted:-6
The Debarring of homosexuals From the papacy:
The Deflowering of homosexuals From the papacy:
I AM AWESOME MAN
The Debarring of homosexuals From the papacy:
Yup! No formerly virginal gay guys in cute robes & weird hats leading the masses. :wah:
My candle's burning at both ends, it will not last the night. But ah, my foes, and oh, my friends--It gives a lovely light!--Edna St. Vincent Millay
The Debarring of homosexuals From the papacy:
Nomad wrote: The Deflowering of homosexuals From the papacy:
That depends on whether you watched Panorama the other night
The Church issued a denial
That depends on whether you watched Panorama the other night
The Church issued a denial
The Debarring of homosexuals From the papacy:
JMHO--the Catholic church EXISTS in a state of denial.:wah:
My candle's burning at both ends, it will not last the night. But ah, my foes, and oh, my friends--It gives a lovely light!--Edna St. Vincent Millay