New respect for Pope & RCC

Sex and Christianity...

Clearly, then, you were not raised as a Lutheran in Wisconsin.

 

<<Clearly, then, you were not raised as a Lutheran in Wisconsin. >>

Nope, you've got me there! I don't know anything about Wisconsin/Lutheran Christians, but they don't sound like very fun people!

Pug

 

Carl

Ohhh! the Wisconsin Synod, Ouch.
I was raised a ELCA Luthern and though much more Liberal, we were basically taught the same thing.

We all know that Lutherns are Catholics with attitudes.

Then again, I disowned organized religion in 1983 and have been much happier since. I feel more at peace with myself and God.

One thing missing when it comes to Christian religions.
Praise the Lord and pass the cash!!!!!

But to each is own.

 

(rude noise)

 

I only had one Wisconcin Synod Lutheran expereince and it tops my experience as the most stodgy, depressing service I have ever been to (I have been to LCMS, Anglican, Epsicopal, AOG, Baptist, COGIC). It was almost funny in places and could have been a parady of what secular Christians view Christians as.

Having said that, what was equally funny is that the Pastor was a substitute teacher to make ends meet and my wife knew him. He was not only bright but very funny. Totally different from the "Christianity is depressing" sermon.

North

 

Wisconsin & self-denial...

Well, being a recent transplant from Wisconsin (lived there for 49 years, until a year ago, and raised as a Lutheran in a small town), I have a few things to say about this subject.... tongue in cheek of course.

Garrison Keillor is very accurate with how he talks about the Lutheran/Catholic cultures of these small towns in Minnesota and Wisconsin. It is very funny, and very true.

It isn't the "Wisconsin Synod" that makes the culture so depressing. It is the weather, the ethnic makeup of the population, and the whole German/socialist tradition that no one should have "more" than anyone else. And of course, sex is not to be talked about, much less engaged in - but of course everyone does.

I love Wisconsin and miss it dearly, but it takes years to understand the true underlying beauty of the place for a newcomer/outsider.

 

Re: Wisconsin & self-denial...

Garrison Keillor is funny. I attended an LCMS church for a couple of years and his descriptions are accurate. One year he talked about folks marching around the church singing "Glory Laud & Honor" and darned if we had not just done that. He has a way of hitting the nail on the head.

I would like a little less of the Guy Noir and a little more of his other humor though.

North

 

Re: Re: Wisconsin & self-denial...

 

The statistics that I provided were to add to the debate, not to prove or disprove the linkage. I have my own views about homosexuality, but I also have views about getting the most accurate infomation available. So much of the debate on this topic tends to be built upon the acceptance of faulty data.

Whether you accept the Kinsey figures that 8-10% of the population is gay or lesbian, or more recent studies by the University of Chicago and others that 2-3% men and 1-2% of women have same-sex orientation, it is reasonable to assume that there is a much higher percentage of male homosexuals among pedophiles than among the general population. While some may make the case that there is a link between homosexuality and pedophilia, I don't think that these figures by themselves can be used to argue (as some do) that homosexuality and pedophilia are the same thing.

Tony Piña
Faculty CSU San Bernardino

 

I have a different take on things. I'd say that there are "sexually sociophathic" people whose sub rosa lives overlap and at times coincide with that of gays. "Gay" may not be the most popular of designations but it certainly beats "pedophile" so "gay" serves as a good cover for pedophilic activities.

That's a view from afar and not well formed but I think this as inevitable as the sub rosa activities of intelligence agencies overlapping and coinciding with those of criminal organizations.

 

Re: The source of the problem...

Carl,

I would disagree strongly with your first paragraph and agree strongly with your second and third.

I cannot comment on Lutheranism (or any individual synod therein), but my church has never taught that sex is "bad" or "dirty". On the contrary, the first commandment given to men and women was "Be fruitful and multiply" (Genesis 1:28) and, shortly after, it was declared "Therefore shall a man leave his father and other and shall cleave unto his wife and they shall be one flesh". Since my youth, I have been taught that healthy intimate marital relationships are ordained by a loving God to allow us to participate in His mircale of creation and also to establish and strengthen the bonds between husband and wife.

There are theological, as well as practical, reasons why I believe that lifetime celebacy for priesthood is incorrect and unwise.

I also think that Garrison Keillor is very clever and funny.

Tony

 

Regarding North's original post, I am also not Catholic, but have always respected and admired when John Paul II has made declarations saying, in essence, that regardless of current fads and fashions of morality, that there are certain doctrinal pillars that make one a Catholic. If you disagree with these pillars, then you should not call yourself a Catholic.

Since I do not accept the Pope as the Successor of Peter and the Vicar of Christ, I have every right to completely disregard his pronoucements. It seems odd to me that someone would profess to espouse a religion and accept the authority of the Church's priesthood, yet come out in open rebellion against church doctrine and hierarchy. Of course, some might not find this odd at all...

...just my one and a half cents (or maybe one and a half sense .

Tony

 

OK, North, so you missed my "Holy Sitzfleisch, Batman!" sermon on the third commandment, solemn high mass with each member singing in his own key, the famous rocket baby, and Rahab the wandering dog.

 

Gotta agree with Tony on this account. If you accept the Church and its values, then you should be under the moral obligation to follow its rulings. The choice is, like the one I made 25 years ago, to separate myself from the Church and understand God and not organized religion. (Diests are cool!)

 

Nothing to back it up

Why is this "reasonable to assume"? Do you have any information to back the claim up with?

 

I never heard this "sex is dirty" hoolerei in church, either. Now, if saying that some sexual activity is right and some is wrong, based on one's reading of the Bible, equals "sex is dirty", then I guess it does. But I don't see that or teach that and I don't know of any of my denominational colleagues that do.

 

Re: Nothing to back it up

Deb that's exactly the place where my eyes stumbled.

I understand that there are differences in the estimates of the number of gays/lesbians in the population (roughly 5-10%), but what does that have to do with pedophilia ? Pedophilia and homosexuality are two different things like pedophilia and heterosexuality. Like Deb, I don't understand where you arrived at that assumption.

 

Re: Moral Authority

Not in my experiences. I did sexual assault investigations for awhile (I left voluntarily....too depressing), and every pedophilia case I was involved in (with one exception) was a man raping a boy.

I really question the validity of any study that states the majority of pedophiles are heterosexual.

 

Pedophilia

I don't know how we got on this subject anyway it is depressing, but here is just one study. Curious, how many sexual assault cases did you work on ?

Are children at risk for sexual abuse by homosexuals?
Pediatrics Volume 94, Issue 1, pp. 41-44, 07/01/1994

Sample: 269 children

In the "...269 cases, two (2) offenders were identified as being gay or lesbian. In 82% of cases (222/269), the alleged offender was a heterosexual partner of a close relative of the child."

 

http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=13455

Nothing has changed since the "rat line" at the end of WWII. Nothing. Scoldings for democracies, endless pity for fascists.