The role of the Catholic church WRT conspiracies

[Sapient Simian]

I agree; most of the priests I've met (in any order) have been well-meaning people.

posting.php?mode=quote&f=8&p=446504#

Well meaning? ?

Please Lord, save us from the men with good intentions!!

I too went to to catholic schools, irish-nun grammar school and a Jesuit high school. Yes they were nice as long as you went with the program. Kowtow to their hierarchy and you will be safely ignored. Don't challenge the paradigm. Don't ask them to reestablish the logic of their "professed" delusion.

Meanwhile, they harbored pedophiles, child abuse (emotional and physical), priests having affairs with married womEn, alcoholics, teachers taking acid with students, larceny, betraying the intention of their idols (Jesus).

"Sister why does God allow evil in the world?" "Its so big you can't begin to imagine how to think about it."

"Father, why did you accept and continue to drive that 240Z?" "Son, they would only give me another one."

My mother's funeral - The priest, while eating the meal that I paid for, refused to shake my hand when I thanked him for the ceremony because I declined communion.

It has been my experience that every priest I have met was motivated to join the brethren because they were terrified of the real world, their personal arrogance would be accepted and used to serve the church, or they knew they would be sheltered from the inquirers into their "proclivities." The robes empowers righteousness of bigotry, condescension, and arrogance.

The only one I have any semblance of respect for decided to leave the priesthood when he saw there was no avenue to review the monolith's integrity.

Forgive the ire, but until they all standup and challenge the cancer that they have harbored for millennia they deserve no emotional quarter. Everyone of them knows of some evil and is doing nothing to address it. Oh, if only there was a Hell.

Apologies for the combative to tone.

[Simulist]

Hi Sapient. First of all, welcome.* Secondly, I don't think you need to apologize; you shared your experience, which is every bit as valid as mine.

Also, on the whole, I have not had a pleasant experience with the Catholic Church (I distrust doctrinaire no-think, especially when I find it costumed in holiness) and notably unpleasant experiences with several priests in particular — but overall (again in my experience) most of the priests I've encountered have been well-intentioned chaps, even if they are given to a religious philosophy that I consider frequently injurious to a healthy spirit.

_________
* Oops. I now see that you've been here since 2008!

[crikkett]

Probably the best collection of intelligence, curiosity and compassion alive is assembled down the street from me in a retirement community for clergy. They write books about how Christianity must change or die and regale me with stories about their missions around the world. Up the hill is another retirement community for Catholic priests. Last year a priest living there was beaten bloody by a man who claims to have been his victim.

What I've learned is that priests fall into the same spectrum of humanity that the rest of us do.

I'm not sure why it's more outrageous to be exploited by a priest than it is to be exploited by anyone else we entrust with our lives... doctors, cops, bankers, mechanics, hairdressers....ships' captains...

(edits for clarity, such as it is)

[Sapient Simian]

Because priests present themselves and arbiters of morality. When their heirarchical structure is designed to facilitate that betrayal and use the garb as a means of camouflaging the act then the structure itself should be examined in the light of day. The best trick the devil ever did was to fool the people into believing he doesn't exist.

[crikkett]

Because priests present themselves and arbiters of morality. When their heirarchical structure is designed to facilitate that betrayal and use the garb as a means of camouflaging the act then the structure itself should be examined in the light of day. The best trick the devil ever did was to fool the people into believing he doesn't exist.

Fair enough, Sapient Simian. I think that the positive outcome of priest sex scandals is that it encourages people to think about who they place their trust in and why.

I personally don't believe that one aspect of well-being, like morality, is more or less important than another, like physical health or social justice: to me, they're all interdependent and therefore all equally valuable.

I should add that my perspective comes from a person who doesn't subject herself to anyone else's moral authority, and who spent enough time in LA to learn how to politely ignore celebrities.

So, I still dig my priestly pals, and the Sisters I party with may be more intimidating than a Maori soccer player but they also perform superhuman feats that go unrecognized and unrewarded.

[Sounder]

One thing shared by all of us, over time and social variations, is how we adapt to social conventions for survival and conformity reasons and yet we always claim that our reasons have to do with morals or higher principles.

Given the general nature of this observation, this seems like a useful place to focus some attention. One major concern at and for all times is the legitimacy of authority. Back in the day the kings presented themselves as being gods. When that could no longer fly the kings found popes that could stand in authority wise and buttress the demands of the more overt temporal authorities. But make no mistake, the authority that always has been the primary driver behind our apparent national governments still lay claim to their god status.

The minions of the godman fantasy believe, perhaps correctly, that as long as people cannot tell the difference between posturing and principles, then the people are best left out of decision making loops. So these folk go on posturing, backed up by promises from the pope that they can do whatever they like as long as they agree to follow any direct order of a superior.

As for themselves, they follow principle, one where they swear a blood oath to do anything within their power to advance the claims of sovereignty of the pope over all temporal powers. Posturing and acting are key elements in achieving the pretensions of these folk, who range from clueless idealists to jaded opportunists with some moving on to raging psychopaths.

Just like the rest of us except that these folk have the ‘guns’ of one of the most powerful institutions in the world.


Oh, although I hesitate to mention it among the discriminating minds of RI, still this is a trifle more relevant than are concerns about the control fantasies of white nationalists.

[Simulist]

One thing shared by all of us, over time and social variations, is how we adapt to social conventions for survival and conformity reasons and yet we always claim that our reasons have to do with morals or higher principles.

Given the general nature of this observation, this seems like a useful place to focus some attention. One major concern at and for all times is the legitimacy of authority. Back in the day the kings presented themselves as being gods. When that could no longer fly the kings found popes that could stand in authority wise and buttress the demands of the more overt temporal authorities. But make no mistake, the authority that always has been the primary driver behind our apparent national governments still lay claim to their god status.

The minions of the godman fantasy believe, perhaps correctly, that as long as people cannot tell the difference between posturing and principles, then the people are best left out of decision making loops. So these folk go on posturing, backed up by promises from the pope that they can do whatever they like as long as they agree to follow any direct order of a superior.

As for themselves, they follow principle, one where they swear a blood oath to do anything within their power to advance the claims of sovereignty of the pope over all temporal powers. Posturing and acting are key elements in achieving the pretensions of these folk, who range from clueless idealists to jaded opportunists with some moving on to raging psychopaths.

Just like the rest of us except that these folk have the ‘guns’ of one of the most powerful institutions in the world.


Oh, although I hesitate to mention it among the discriminating minds of RI, still this is a trifle more relevant than are concerns about the control fantasies of white nationalists.

Well. I'm really not sure who "these folk" or "they" really is here, but I'd be willing to bet good money that you're painting with a pretty broad brush. Also, if you're referring to the average priest — or even the average Jesuit priest — he might be tremendously surprised to find himself counted among that number. Still. In this day and age.

(Well, surprised for a minute or two, at most, before he remembers that over-hyped university function he's been dreading, and realizes he's now late for.)

And, as for having sworn "a blood oath to do anything within their power to advance the claims of sovereignty of the pope over all temporal powers"? Come on. Really? Don't confuse the vaunted babble of ritual with what people actually do, for heaven's sake — if such a thing really could be counted on, you'd have millions of people actually "loving their neighbor" a helluva lot more than they're doing now!

Incidentally, I know one Holy Cross priest who said of the pope, and I quote, "I wouldn't walk across the street to see that son of a bitch." He's by no means alone in that sentiment — he just actually said it. In public.

[Sounder]

Well. I'm really not sure who "these folk" or "they" really is here

I am referring to folk that secure their position by subjecting themselves to the authority of another through the use of oaths of obedience. Your friend quite reasonably detests the Pope, but he still swore obedience to him.

Don't confuse the vaunted babble of ritual with what people actually do,

Tis true that I am often times confused, but anyway

that everyday life of your friend is what you see him do, whereas what he does out of site may be quite different. Posturing is the name of the game and while your friend may do nothing evil with his posturing, its very ubiquity serves as covers for those that do choose to do evil.

This is one example of what a person will actually do, and in my opinion he did it partly because of a blood oath that inherently carries very little respect for the life let alone the sanctity of the lives of Buddhists.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/adamcurtis/2 ... art_9.html

Then there was the extraordinary Colonel Edward Lansdale. He was an advertising executive who invented what he called "psywar" when he almost singlehandedly stopped a communist takeover of the Philippines in the 1950s.

To do this Lansdale employed anthropologists to research into the fears and beliefs of the Huk rebels. He then used the information ruthlessly to create more fear. He described how he used the terror of vampires.

"One Psywar operation played upon the popular fear of asuang, or vampire. When a Huk patrol came along the trail, the ambushers silently snatched the last man of the patrol.

They punctured his neck with two holes, vampire fashion, held the body up by the heels, drained it of blood, and put the corpse back on the trail.
When the Huks returned to look for the missing man and found their bloodless comrade, every member of the patrol believed that the asuang had got him and that one of them would be next"

Lansdale said these techniques were incredibly effective.

Lansdale was SMOM, and must have been truly committed to an imperative that you or I can only wonder about.

http://www.bbsradio.com/cgi-bin/webbbs/ ... ad;id=8613

To be a Knight, one must not only be from wealthy, aristocratic lineage, one must also have a psychological worldview which is attracted to the "crusader mentality'' of these "warrior monks." Participating in SMOM including its initiation ceremonies and feudal ritual dress members embrace a certain caste/class mentality; they are sociologically and psychologically predisposed to function as the ''shock troops" of Catholic reaction. And this is precisely the historical role the Knights have played in the wars against Islam, against the Protestant "heresy,'' and against the Soviet ''Evil Empire."

I can and may continue going on about what various oath takers do. You may think this to be babble of ritual, but I assure you that the Captain of the Titanic did not travel at full speed through an ice field because of the babble of ritual.

[Simulist]

You're creating something out of nothing, Sounder — or you appear to be trying to.

And while creation ex nihilo is said to be a miracle, in this case the attempt looks just a little silly.

[Sounder]

You're creating something out of nothing, Sounder — or you appear to be trying to.

Would you then consider that the activities of people like Lansdale, General Beauregard or Gen. Martin Dempsey to be independent of or not influenced by their religious oaths?

[Simulist]

People are influenced by their religious oaths, sure — but they are more influenced by self-interest, and the best people are most influenced by personal integrity and a sincere quest for the truth.

Priests — like everyone else — fall into all categories.

[Sounder]

People are influenced by their religious oaths, sure — but they are more influenced by self-interest, and the best people are most influenced by personal integrity and a sincere quest for the truth.

Priests — like everyone else — fall into all categories.

Yes and many who were dealt that hand, in days gone by especially, handled their authority responsibly even after they found out the truth about the falsity of the authority above them. Yet as they learn of the complications of holding a hand that is based on claims of the good, even an absolute good, they often times choose to continue to support the false authority instead of admitting to their gullibility and losing their job, identity, and pension. Not to mention the scariness of halving to learn whole new ways of thinking. I don’t much fault or blame them for this, as we all get pretty damn confused when confronting the failed strategies of our lives.

But this here is only about Priests as people, when the CC as an institution is the entity that can and does place very dedicated acolytes in all critical positions of power.

Those folk are not ‘the best people [that] are most influenced by personal integrity and a sincere quest for the truth’, but their self interest and posturing were second to none.

There is no way Monsanto could get away with placing their people as regulators and with poisoning the food stocks of the whole world without the backing of some very deeply entrenched influence.

Can anyone spell Georgetown?

[Simulist]

Yes and many who were dealt that hand, in days gone by especially, handled their authority responsibly even after they found out the truth about the falsity of the authority above them. Yet as they learn of the complications of holding a hand that is based on claims of the good, even an absolute good, they often times choose to continue to support the false authority instead of admitting to their gullibility and losing their job, identity, and pension.

And then what?

I did do exactly that. I studied theology in college, and then went on to a graduate-level seminary for four years — after all, I'd prepared my whole life for this. But ultimately, I did see that it was all bunk, and — not wanting to enslave other souls in tangled webs of guilt — I got out. And lost everything.

But was that the good thing to do? And was it the best thing? I thought it was at the time, but now I'm not so sure. Here's why.

Some of my friends who stayed in, and went on with their careers from the inside, have done MUCH MORE GOOD for those who needed it most than I have, because they've had a direct influence on the people who needed to be influenced — people I lost access to.

So it's easy to judge, Sounder. I know because I've judged plenty. Too much, in fact. For many years I held many of the same opinions that you are expressing here. They seemed right, but where judging PEOPLE is concerned, I had only a limited perspective — as both you and I do still.

[Sounder]

I'm sorry that you feel that there are judgmental elements in my criticisms. I have given much thought to the idea of working from the inside versus working from the outside, and concluded long ago that different personalities called for variations of responses to this question. I support insiders attempts to continue the good struggle but except for cops, who treat me like I'm on some 'do not mess with list', I seldom find support from the inside.

Simulist wrote...

Some of my friends who stayed in, and went on with their careers from the inside, have done MUCH MORE GOOD for those who needed it most than I have, because they've had a direct influence on the people who needed to be influenced — people I lost access to.

I wonder what kind of good you might be referring to, before I make what might be a foolish response.

[Simulist]

Some, a few, are influential to bishops. The rest are influential in helping the laity not to take the more harmful Catholic dogmas and doctrines too seriously — and if a real priest can tell a lay person that they really won't be burning in hell because they've chosen to defy the Church's more nutty directives, then I consider that a net plus.