Is pedophilia permissable?

Clint,

Church is for the sinners....kicking someone out of Church for committing a sin is not what I see in Christ's message......so what do you do...lots of people in Church commit sin...are their groups of church members assigned to ferret out the sinners so you can remove them from your midst?

What about fornicators? Would you let an unmarried pregnant woman come to Church?

How about overweight members (gluttony is one of the 7 deadly sins)...do you kick them out to if they don't meet weight requirements?

Just how far does this go?

Shaking my head.....

LaRae

 

Did you read 1 Corinthians 5: 1-13? Are you questioning Clint or Paul?

~Lorelei

 

LaRae - Churching is relatively rare in the modern day but it does and can occur. If you are truly interested in the Baptist perspective of excommunication, I found two threads in the Baptist area of the board for you:

http://www.baptistboard.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=10&t=000616&p=

http://www.baptistboard.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=10&t=000881&p=

 

LaRae, you are not even being logical, let alone biblical.

1. church is for believers -- Christians. It is where we gather to learn and praise the Lord together. If, by 'sinner, you are referring to an unbeliever, then you are wrong. They are welcome to visit church, but church is not FOR them. It is for us. Other than that, we are all sinners.

2. what do you see in Christ's message that is tolerant of sin, please? He loved sinners. He DIED because of our sins.

3. As far as fornication, etc., God knows who is doing what. The idea with the church's discipline is that when an habitual sin, such as fornication, becomes known to members in the church, we truly desire to be able to present ourselves as pure in Christ before the Lord and to tolerate something AFTER it has been brought to our attention is to marginalize both Christ's love for us and the work He did for us. It is, as Hebrews 6 points out, to crucify Christ all over again.

4. We do not need to 'ferret out' sin. We know we all sin. That is not the point. Stumbling in sin is not the same as living in sin. A person belonging to Christ does not WANT to sin and will repent and beseech the Lord not just to forgive him but to change that part of his life. This is quite different from a person who wants to sin, prefers to sin, and yet wants also to remain known as a Christian in a Christian church. The first is part of spiritual growth and maturity, and of a person becoming more and more the image of Christ Himself (Romans 8:28-30). The second is a hypocrite and needs to be removed from the church body as he or she can only do it harm. There is also a time, as mentioned in the NT, that temporary removal from the church association is a necessary means of discipline, intended to bring the believer 'to his senses' in seeing how serious the chosen, repeated sin is, and urging him or her toward repentance and change in Christ.

5. Gluttony is different from overweight. Ask any bulimic.

 

From the CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA on excommunication:

Those are the RCC's very own rules. That is, of course, unless Catholicism says that pedophilia is okay and not a heresy...

 

ReIpsaLoquitor:
Your story is really a very tragic story. Of course, other than that you were molested when you were young, I don't know how severe that event was, so it is hard for me to know how to respond. I truly feel sorry for you that you had to suffer all those years with such hatred of your uncle, even to the point of rejoicing when he had a heart attack.
I guess that sorta of goes along with my point. I probably didn't have the same reaction as you because I was not bothered by the whole thing, and in fact, put myself in a position for it to happen again. I guess I relate my story for those that were closer to my experience, rather than yours. Of course, if some one is raped, and physically burtalzed, that is so different than what happened to me.

I'm afaid that alot of people, because they have been told my "councelors" or "therapists" or someone in "authority" that they SHOULD be devastated and waking up in the night with nightmares, they are convinced something is wrong with them if they don't. Those are the people I'm trying to reach. I'm saying, don't fall into that. Worse things can and do happen. Let it go. Get on with life, etc.

Your story is tragic and that one event seems to have really totally messed up your life. That is so sad. I hope you are doing better now. I just thank God that I handled it completely different -- although the circumstances sound completely different. Believe me, I am not saying that you are wrong for feeling the way you do. I think the situations were very different.

For me, it was no big deal. I realized it was wrong, but the funny thing is, I NEVER to this day felt any anger or hatred to that person. He was much older, was very nice to me, and never FORCED me into anything. So, I sinned against God, and truly repented for that. For the other person, I have always prayed that he was regenerated by a free gift of grace and brought into the kingdom of light. I realize that ALL sin and fall short of the glory of God. Nothing is impossible with God!! After all, HE decided to save a wretch like me. Grace is amazing!!!!!
Peace
James2

[ April 17, 2002, 10:48 PM: Message edited by: JAMES2 ]

 

Clint,

Can a unmarried pregnant woman attend Church or not?

Can a person who is overweight attend Church or not? Anything in excess is thought to be sinful is it not?

LaRae

 

LaRae -

That would be a decision made by the local autonomous church and their assessment of the individual. Did you even read the threads I posted? At some point you are welcome to open a thread discussing the scriptural view of church discipline if the threads I gave you still left you in the dark.

But then again, the situation with Laws has NOTHING to do with me nor scriptural views. That is a matter with which YOUR faith will have to deal. From what I read in the Catholic encyclopedia, only the pope has the power to excommunicate a cardinal. Sad for you guys. Church autonomy is scriptural and empowers the believers in the church in accordance with 1Peter 2:9-10. Unfortunately now none of you will have a voice in this and you will all have to suffer the black eye that your faith has suffered for this atrocious situation.

So despite the overwhelming majority of followers in his diocese demanding a resignation, they're still stuck with this evil.

[ April 18, 2002, 12:40 AM: Message edited by: Clint Kritzer ]

 

James 2, Are you saying you were seduced by a priest sexually and you're ok with this, you enjoyed it and expected it? Maybe I'll see you on the cover of TIME next week?

 

From the CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA on excommunication:

Those are the RCC's very own rules. That is, of course, unless Catholicism says that pedophilia is okay and not a heresy...</font>[/QUOTE]Clint, you surprise me. By your logic then every sinner must be excommunicated.

Also, you are judging the interior of others. Do you know the heart of any particular person who is guilty of any particular sin?

Tell me Clint, is it possible that a sinner could fall into the same sin more than once and still anguish over it? Is it possible to sin and then repent and then fall into the same sin again?

You know better than to make the arguement that you are attempting.

Ron

 

Ron -

I am not saying that every sinner must be excommunicated. It is those that fall into the category outlined in the 1Corinthians passage I already cited a page ago. These are not my instructions, they are the Apostle Paul's. Paul gave these instructions because of the way some guy and his mother-in-law were carrying on a public affair and the way it made the church look to the outside community. Hence the statement, "It is actually reported that there is sexual immorality among you, and of a kind that does not occur even among pagans."

Look at how Law's actions have made your church appear to the outside world. There is nothing wrong with my logic. This is a scriptural teaching. Even your own faith allows for excommunication.

I am not going to defend scriptural principles about excommunication any longer on this thread. I have provided the scriptural passage that supports it, I have provided two additional threads that discuss it, and I have even provided a statement from the Catholic Encyclopedia that confirm it. I do not see where the dilemna is unless you just want to argue a Christian principle that has existed since the time of Christ. Try Matthew 18:17 for another reference.

It is not that I "know better" than to make this argument but I did know that something so rooted in scripture would go right over the heads of some who allow their faith to be dictated to them.

- Clint

 

One other point I wanted to make last night to laRae and forgot: Gluttony is a "sin" by name according to the Greeks. Titus mention "lazy gluttons" and there is a reference in Proverbs to gluttony, but one must tie together several passages of scripture to define gluttony as a sin in the Christian philosophy. Don't confuse the "seven deadly sins" as a Christian concept.

You will not find this list in the Bible, though I would not be a bit surprised if the RCC borrowed it for some canon or such.

 

Clint,

For getting on to me quite severely not a week or two ago, I'm appalled by your behavior on this thread. In fact, I don't even know how to respond here, because legitimate arguments are torn to shreds.

A sin is a heresy? You made this up.

The priests should be excommunicated? I didn't know they'd gone to trial, and we've proven them guilty. Gee, if I become a priest, I sure do hope someone doesn't falsely accuse me of pedophilia, because I should just be SHOT because I am EVIL! No need of a trial or anything! If you're Catholic, and you're a priest, and someone says you molested them (being celibate and all, you are prone to such evils, of course), it must be true!

And by all means, instead of giving Cardinal Law a second chance, of which the Pope is doing, by working with him to clean up what he started (by "working harder"), we should cast stones at him and kick him out. I mean, he can never do good again! The devil is surely in him!

I have NEVER seen such rash judgements as I have here. If I was on trial, and you were my jury, Lord have mercy on me.

This thread is disgusting.

 

</font>[/QUOTE]Justifying your own actions, eh Clint?

 

Have you read your private messages?

From Dictionary.com :

her·e·sy Pronunciation Key (hr-s)
n. pl. her·e·sies

1.
a. An opinion or a doctrine at variance with established religious beliefs, especially dissension from or denial of Roman Catholic dogma by a professed believer or baptized church member.
b. Adherence to such dissenting opinion or doctrine.

2.
a. A controversial or unorthodox opinion or doctrine, as in politics, philosophy, or science.
b. Adherence to such controversial or unorthodox opinion.

Thank you for crediting me with creating the word, but it was there when I got here.

Ex-communication is completely seperate from the laws of the state, excepting the passages that speak of submitting to governmental authority.

If Law had punched one of those perverts in the nose I would be heralding him as a hero. He didn't do that. He allowed these pedophiles to remain in a position of authority and allowed part of the offering of the very parents of theser children to be used for salary of the offenders.

If you were guilty, then maybe the Lord WOULD have mercy. I would not.

What is disgusting is that anyone would even TRY to defend this abomination commited by these priest, this cardinal and the pope.

[ April 18, 2002, 12:18 PM: Message edited by: Clint Kritzer ]

 

First of all, James2, that one event did not totally mess up my whole life as you stated. It definately changed the person that I would have been had not this " event " happened to me. I believe that God uses all things, good and bad, to draw us closer to him.Because of what happened to me, I have been able to share my story with others like myself. I believe there are more abused people out there than most of the world realizes. Only after many, many, years could I even talk about what had occurred because it still lingers with me though I know it is in the past.I feel most people decline to discuss these hideous events because it makes others uncomfortable. Furthermore, the person that the story was shared with might even react differently towards the person that shared their story with them.Fear of being rejected and scorned is a big deterrant to "survivor's" telling painful events in one's life to others.

Without me repeating everything I already said earlier, I will say yes, we did respond differently to our circumstances.However, I know that I forgave my uncle for what he did but that doesn't mean the human part of me wasn't glad when I no longer had to fear him. Sure I asked God to forgive me for having those thoughts but my Bible reads for ALL HAVE SINNED AND COME SHORT OF THE GLORY OF GOD.Just as he sinned against me, I too, sinned by being glad when he was no longer on this earth. SO WHAT&gt;&gt;&gt;I asked Jesus to forgive me of this sin and the Bible says he is faithful to forgive us of our sins and cleanse us of all unrighteousness.I certainly am far from perfect but I know my sins have been forgiven. I was just sharing my feelings regarding this event in my life,with all of you people who I do not know and have never met before in my life.Why did I share this ? I did it for all the other people that have been victimized when they were young and still can't voice their feelings over what occurred in their lives.I have gone on with my life and have forgiven but you can never forget!

In a lot of ways it's easier to talk to everyone on this site by computer. That way no one knows me or my family or what I look like. Furthermore, I can't see if there are shocked or dis-interested expressions on peoples faces reading my posts.Both types of reactions are equally dis-comforting to a person who has bared their very soul to complete strangers.However, I am willing to doing this if something I have written is a comfort to even one person who has read my posts.

I thank God that he saved me and loves me no matter what I have ever thought or done.

 

Correct again Clint.

What is tough for me to stomach about this whole thing is the way many catholics keep saying "same % as in the public" or something like that.

DON'T DEFEND IT! YOU SHOULD BE AGAINST IT!

I equate this sort of misplaced zeal as the same sort of love for a sports team some people have. People will defend the character or actions of their favorite athletes (actors, musicians, politicians etc) to no end just so they can justify their own beliefs and positions.

Christians should be WAY above this. We see sin, something as terrible as this, and we should be against it. This includes the catholic church and its leaders. In fact, they(catholic leaders) should be MORE against it for the simple fact that this is 1. their livelyhood 2. They are supposed to represent the highest moral character of the church body and 3. they are supposed to set examples for the church body.

Do not defend the evils of the past. Recognize them and try to root out the sinners and punish them accordingly. It is that simple.

In Christ,
jason

 

In past threads I have noted that Catholic apologists have defended the Inquistion, the burning at the stake of Bible-believing "heretics," the burning of Bibles, and so it comes to me as no surprise that they would defend something so pervese and vile.
DHK