This has been an interesting discussion and one I've been trying to avoid, just because it can be so volatile. Not that volatility should be avoided, but emotion often gets in our way. Cnghr, I'm a Baptist, but will quickly admit I am far from perfect. I don't have all the answers. I don't always agree with everything that is said in my church. Of course Baptists are like anyone else, Get three people together and you will have four opinions. Also, I belong to a very conservative Baptist group, but want to emphasize, I have never seen pamphlets some of you describe in my church or other's like mine. Not that I'm questioning you, no doubt there are many different religious groups that use material such as that hoping the shock value will convince some of the error of their thinking causing them to convert. As a Baptist I have serious differences with my Catholic friends, but find it reprehensible that you have had some of the experiences you've had. It is reprehensble and absolutely wrong for a very simple reason, rather than win over converts it tends to drive people away, much like some of you have said. Straight talk is important, just as it is in the HR arena, but needs to be tempered with love.
What I also find interesting is I've been having an online discussion recently with a blogger friend who asserts that religion in general is evil, no matter what stripe it is. He was raised in a mainline Protestant denomination, but has come to the conclusion that just as Marx said, religion is the opiate of the masses. He has gone so far as to assert that people of faith should be excluded from the public square - our divisiveness and hatred of others unlike us negates our freedom to participate politically. And arguments, such as on this thread, are just fuel to add to his fire. We are demonstrating why he believes religion is dangerous. "I believe my way is the only way, therefore anyone who disagrees with me is condemned". This leads to persecution and war and death. Exhibit A, Ireland where the Protestants and Catholics have been fighting for decades killing each other in the name of God.
I'm not suggesting we should all hold hands and accept every religious belief as valid, but we need to be cognizant of how we are perceived.
Ray you are just too articulate and right on the money. One difference I would have though is that an open dialogue like this one, has, in my opinion, been meaningful and I feel has a more positive aura to it than how it started. Religion is a touchy subject for those of us who claim to be faithful, so there is bound to be emotional reactions regardless of the statements made. It is somewhat surprising that we have done as well as we have as a country when there is still so much divisiveness (new word?) among the masses. Fact is we have been most successful when we have united as a country against or for a common cause. We can truly marvel at our ability to put aside our differences and lock arms for the good of all. And the vast majority of people believe in good, want good, want to be good, and are willing to fight against evil (or any term equivalent to it). All major religions have the common goal of teaching good over evil, provide a positive influence to behave rightly, and guide their members to salvation. Intolerance is an unfortunate anomaly in some cases, but I guess I'm still optimistic enough to believe intolerance is in the micro minority. And you know I have the answer to Rodney King's question: Yes, we can all just get along!! But we do have to work at it.
Paul, it's nice to hear you state that I am as entitled to my view as you are to yours, even though our views may be different. Too many people don't stop to think that if they are free to have their own opinion then others are also free to disagree, and that we can still talk about it in a reasonable and rational manner.
Ray, unfortunately the time period during which I was growing up in the (Southern) Baptist church was a time when a lot of pastors believed in the "scare the he**" out of them approach to saving souls. It seemed (to me anyhow) that any tactic you could use to get people to say they were born again was acceptable, whether or not it produced a genuine conversion experience. And not all of the derision and lack of respect for other denominations was hateful, much of it was done in a comedic vein, as in jokes told during sermons. But the hateful and frightening stuff I did see during my childhood definitely colored the way I view some aspects of certain denominations.
Along the same line, when my son was growing up in the Baptist church, for some reason someone at our church was emphasizing the "evils" of rock music (no, this was not the 50's, it was the 80's!) and when he was a teenager he told me that for years when he was younger he thought he'd damned forever if he listened to rock. Poor kid, I'm quite the metal-head and I can only imagine what he must think awaited his mom in the afterlife if they based salvation on my record collection!
Steaks, I too think the debate and discussion is healthy. My concern is that the emotions don't get in the way of real communication. If you're interested check out this blog, [url]http://horsepoup.blogspot.com/[/url]. The first thread on Religious wackos in Texas is good. We tend to be lengthy, but I find it enjoyable and if nothing else I find discussions like this will either strengthen my commitment to my beliefs or cause me to challenge them and maybe even make some changes.
I have nothing useful or interesting to add to the topic. I just wanted to point out how happy I am that you guys can debate in a civil manner. Very mature, even with some widely differing views. I didn't have to step in even once to help find the middle ground.
I am not being the least bit sarcastic. Saying that makes it seem even more sarcastic, but it's not.
John Phillips Editor, Tennessee Employment Law Letter Miller & Martin
I'm a little late weighing in, but I did have a couple of posts about the papal visit on my blog last week, trying to link it with employment law. I was unsuccessful in doing so based on the comments I received to my first and second posts. Since I love to be beaten over the head, I thought I'd give you guys a chance in the event you didn't read my posts.
Glad you joined our discussion. I don't know about my fellow forumites, but I try to read your blog daily. In case no one has told you, thanks for contributing to the betterment of HR.
joannie
PS - No Children, I am not polishing apples for the teacher!
John is right. Its a good start and the Pope deserves the benefit of the doubt. BUT... he needs to also take concrete, dramatic action. Sooner than later.
The town next to mine was home to a serial abuser that had been relocated from parish to parish. I have heard the stories of his victims and for many of them, they never really "healed" from the abuse the suffered. Its affected their whole lives.
So much pain and anguish would have been avoided if the Catholic church had dealt with these criminals in a proper way from the outset.
Halfway between my house and my office is a "retreat" for priests who need to be taken out of action, so to speak. It gets a little press now and again, but since my wife is the district administrator for the state's probation and parole division, she deals with its residents on a regular basis. It's tough on her, since she grew up Catholic, attended Catholic schools through 8th grade, and has 3 cousins who were among the earliest "compensated" victims in this area. Their abuse came to light over 25 years ago, and their abuser remained active in the Church even after the settlement.
Pedophiles are drawn to positions where they have access to kids. Organizations that provide access must bear the responsibility to protect those kids from anyone who would seek to hurt them. The Catholic Church has failed in that regard. Not just failed, they have been part of the problem to varying degrees by protecting the criminals not the victims.
It's interesting the offenders have been taken care of, the Church could easily just cut them loose then who knows what would happen. But, it seems the victims have been left to suffer. Maybe that will change now with this increased focus. But, it makes me wonder, is this just primarily an American problem? Why is the Pope addressing it now that he visited us? It doesn't happen elsewhere? Of course there are the other victims, people like your wife, Frank. Those who faith may be shaken who may turn their back on the Church thinking it is all a farce as a result of the actions of a very minute minority.
Her relationship with the Catholic Church is pretty much shot already. It started when her home parish - where four generations had attended mass and where she went to K-8 - declined to let us get married in her church because I lived in a different city and attended the required pre-marriage counseling at a Catholic church in the other city. The final straw was when the priest of the church nearest our current home physically intercepted her when she was on her way to the altar for communion, telling her (loudly and publicly) it had been too long since her last confession and she couldn't receive sacrament. Oh... Did I mention this was DURING HER MOTHER'S FUNERAL MASS ? It was over at that point.
The same thing happened to me at my mother's funeral. It was truly embarrassing. Having been a catholic since the day I was born, having attended catholic schools through grade 12, having seen changes to the mass (no, I'm not capitalizing mass either) including being taught as a child that it was a sin to touch the eucharist and then it was decided we were able to take it in our hands, opened my eyes to the reality that the catholic church determines and defines sins of rules that are man-made. Only the Lord Jesus Christ has direction over my life, not a church. I confess my sins to Him, ask Him for forgiveness of my sins and ask for guidance not to sin again. Paul, at this point, I just had to open my mouth publicly. I'm sure there are many devout catholics out there who are Christians. But this one has converted.
It is so pleasing that you have all found a topic you can bond with. You should all be thankful that your denomination has been pure and without incidents. I suppose though that you will hold all Mormons accountable for the cult in Texas. And all the Baptist must believe the same things that Reverend Wright preaches. Jimmy Swaggart, Jim Baker, etc. have of course condemned their entire following to hell because of what they did. So again, be thankful that you do not below to one of these denominations, and that your's remains pure and innocent of all sin. No question the Church did a poor job initially in handling the abuse cases, and without question there have been priests who performed outside the guidance of the Church in rejecting Communion to some people during a Mass. That should have been addressed with the individual beforehand not during. I do not disagree with the priest denying the person Holy Communion because the requirements of the Sacrament are clear to any Catholic who paid any attention to their instructions. So indulge yourself, continuing the attacks, we'll take them. We are a stronger more united Church now that we have owned up publicly to our problems and addressed them. You should only hope for the same from your denomination.
Jim, this is why I have really avoided this thread until recently. I hope my post above wasn't offensive, it wasn't meant to be. I was just trying to ask some questions that are on my mind. I have truly tried to be careful what I write and how I write. I do have strong opinions, but more importantly I don't want to offend decent people like you. And Joannie. And others. Yes, all religious groups probably have similar problems. As a Baptist, I know it has hit our organization. One difference though, is when one of our pastors is caught in an act like this, typically they are cut off and rejected. I'm not sure that makes us better, because at least the RC's try to do something to help these guys who fall and fail.
One clarification, Pastor Wright is not Baptist. He's United Church of Christ, the opposite end of the political and theological spectrum from the typical Baptist.
I agree that all churches have problems, I'm not denying that fact at all. And there are many people who think they are Christians just because they attend a church when indeed they are not. But my point was that many denominations determine what a person should and shouldn't do in the law of the particular church with catholic churches being a part of that. My church tells me not to drink, smoke or go to movies. Being a former catholic, I understand your defensive comments - been there, done that.
"One difference though, is when one of our pastors is caught in an act like this, typically they are cut off and rejected. I'm not sure that makes us better, because at least the RC's try to do something to help these guys who fall and fail."
What about family members who are caught in some type of crime? Do you reject them and cut them off? Most families I know condemn the crime, not the criminal. They still provide love and support to the offending family member, and forgiveness. As a church family should we do less?
You are right Joannie. I"m not suggesting a church family shouldn't take care of each other. As is often the case, the best course of action is probably somewhere in the middle.
John Phillips Editor, Tennessee Employment Law Letter Miller & Martin
I do like this group.
When I posted the Pope posts on my blog, I didn't intend to offend the Catholic Church or the Pope. Yet, most of the comments I received were seemingly from Catholics who took what I said very personally and were offended. It's very difficult to talk about religion, particularly when talking about a single church, without stirring passion and a bit of anger. That makes some sense I suppose, but I think ya'll have done a great job of talking about this in a reasonable, respectful way.
Putting religion aside, I continue to despair a bit (and this was really what my Pope posts were about) over the failure of the top leader--of any kind of organization--being willing to make hard decisions and take hard actions designed to deal with things that are just flat out wrong. Benedict XVI took a small step toward doing this while he was in the states, and we'll see how far he's willing to go.
In the interest of full disclosure, I was raised in the Church of Christ, spent 20+ years in the Christian Church (Disciples of Christ), and am now an Episcopalian. My search continues for the problem-free church.
I have only one last thing to say: God (or whatever you observe as your supreme being) bless you all, and I mean that. Now if THAT statement causes controvesry, I give up!!
DMK, it's good to see you joining in on the fun here in the humor section, though sometimes it doesn't seem all that humorous. Some of us who have been around awhile - yeah Joannie, I'm talking about you - tend to get in a rut. It's good to hear new perspectives.
I'm somewhat surprised I still haven't been served with a lawsuit for even mentioning Scientology earlier.
BTW, on a related note... If you get a chance to hear the song "Tom Cruise Crazy" by Jonathan Coulton, be prepared to have it stuck in your head for days!
Comments
What I also find interesting is I've been having an online discussion recently with a blogger friend who asserts that religion in general is evil, no matter what stripe it is. He was raised in a mainline Protestant denomination, but has come to the conclusion that just as Marx said, religion is the opiate of the masses. He has gone so far as to assert that people of faith should be excluded from the public square - our divisiveness and hatred of others unlike us negates our freedom to participate politically. And arguments, such as on this thread, are just fuel to add to his fire. We are demonstrating why he believes religion is dangerous. "I believe my way is the only way, therefore anyone who disagrees with me is condemned". This leads to persecution and war and death. Exhibit A, Ireland where the Protestants and Catholics have been fighting for decades killing each other in the name of God.
I'm not suggesting we should all hold hands and accept every religious belief as valid, but we need to be cognizant of how we are perceived.
And the vast majority of people believe in good, want good, want to be good, and are willing to fight against evil (or any term equivalent to it). All major religions have the common goal of teaching good over evil, provide a positive influence to behave rightly, and guide their members to salvation. Intolerance is an unfortunate anomaly in some cases, but I guess I'm still optimistic enough to believe intolerance is in the micro minority.
And you know I have the answer to Rodney King's question: Yes, we can all just get along!!
But we do have to work at it.
It doesnt bother me in the least if someone tells me they think my beliefs are wrong. They are entitled to their view as I am to mine.
Ray, unfortunately the time period during which I was growing up in the (Southern) Baptist church was a time when a lot of pastors believed in the "scare the he**" out of them approach to saving souls. It seemed (to me anyhow) that any tactic you could use to get people to say they were born again was acceptable, whether or not it produced a genuine conversion experience. And not all of the derision and lack of respect for other denominations was hateful, much of it was done in a comedic vein, as in jokes told during sermons. But the hateful and frightening stuff I did see during my childhood definitely colored the way I view some aspects of certain denominations.
Along the same line, when my son was growing up in the Baptist church, for some reason someone at our church was emphasizing the "evils" of rock music (no, this was not the 50's, it was the 80's!) and when he was a teenager he told me that for years when he was younger he thought he'd damned forever if he listened to rock. Poor kid, I'm quite the metal-head and I can only imagine what he must think awaited his mom in the afterlife if they based salvation on my record collection!
I am not being the least bit sarcastic. Saying that makes it seem even more sarcastic, but it's not.
John Phillips
Editor, Tennessee Employment Law Letter
Miller & Martin
I'm a little late weighing in, but I did have a couple of posts about the papal visit on my blog last week, trying to link it with employment law. I was unsuccessful in doing so based on the comments I received to my first and second posts. Since I love to be beaten over the head, I thought I'd give you guys a chance in the event you didn't read my posts.
[url]http://hrheroblogs.com/theword/2008/04/18/the-pope-and-employment-law-redux/[/url]
Glad you joined our discussion. I don't know about my fellow forumites, but I try to read your blog daily. In case no one has told you, thanks for contributing to the betterment of HR.
joannie
PS - No Children, I am not polishing apples for the teacher!
The town next to mine was home to a serial abuser that had been relocated from parish to parish. I have heard the stories of his victims and for many of them, they never really "healed" from the abuse the suffered. Its affected their whole lives.
So much pain and anguish would have been avoided if the Catholic church had dealt with these criminals in a proper way from the outset.
Paul, at this point, I just had to open my mouth publicly. I'm sure there are many devout catholics out there who are Christians. But this one has converted.
No question the Church did a poor job initially in handling the abuse cases, and without question there have been priests who performed outside the guidance of the Church in rejecting Communion to some people during a Mass. That should have been addressed with the individual beforehand not during. I do not disagree with the priest denying the person Holy Communion because the requirements of the Sacrament are clear to any Catholic who paid any attention to their instructions.
So indulge yourself, continuing the attacks, we'll take them. We are a stronger more united Church now that we have owned up publicly to our problems and addressed them. You should only hope for the same from your denomination.
One clarification, Pastor Wright is not Baptist. He's United Church of Christ, the opposite end of the political and theological spectrum from the typical Baptist.
What about family members who are caught in some type of crime? Do you reject them and cut them off? Most families I know condemn the crime, not the criminal. They still provide love and support to the offending family member, and forgiveness. As a church family should we do less?
John Phillips
Editor, Tennessee Employment Law Letter
Miller & Martin
I do like this group.
When I posted the Pope posts on my blog, I didn't intend to offend the Catholic Church or the Pope. Yet, most of the comments I received were seemingly from Catholics who took what I said very personally and were offended. It's very difficult to talk about religion, particularly when talking about a single church, without stirring passion and a bit of anger. That makes some sense I suppose, but I think ya'll have done a great job of talking about this in a reasonable, respectful way.
Putting religion aside, I continue to despair a bit (and this was really what my Pope posts were about) over the failure of the top leader--of any kind of organization--being willing to make hard decisions and take hard actions designed to deal with things that are just flat out wrong. Benedict XVI took a small step toward doing this while he was in the states, and we'll see how far he's willing to go.
In the interest of full disclosure, I was raised in the Church of Christ, spent 20+ years in the Christian Church (Disciples of Christ), and am now an Episcopalian. My search continues for the problem-free church.
Now if THAT statement causes controvesry, I give up!!
BTW, on a related note... If you get a chance to hear the song "Tom Cruise Crazy" by Jonathan Coulton, be prepared to have it stuck in your head for days!