Where was all of this anger before?
2007-09-13 13:32:02 · 12 answers · asked by beeze 4 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Carpanone Kid: Let me guess who has been informing you....just one guess...umm...I'll guess THE CATHOLIC CHURCH. Yeah...the church has been very aggressive...so has OJ with finding the real killer
2007-09-13 15:07:51 · update #1
Julia....it's clear you are a sheep, but who is your sheppard? People forget that sometimes.
2007-09-14 17:52:02 · update #2
Where was the anger???
Just look at what happens as soon as someone around here starts trash talking Jebus ;);););)
2007-09-13 13:38:59 · answer #1 · answered by kr_toronto 7 · 3⤊ 1⤋
clergymen was once allowed to marry, and jap ceremony clergymen nonetheless are. sometime, the Latin ceremony clergymen could be allowed to marry, too, yet not till the laity of the Church steps up and does a great style of the paintings. For now, being a clergyman is a 24/7/365 criminal accountability, and a clergyman can not good shield a spouse and little ones whilst he's devoting lots time to the Church. If the laity could do greater to assist feed the hungry, shield the homeless, bypass to the ill, convenience the loss of life, teach the ignorant, and so on., and so on., it may be diverse. additionally, there's a economic attention -- the version between helping a clergyman vs. helping a clergyman, his spouse and his little ones is substantial. clergymen are sexual beings, only like something human beings. they simply grant their sexuality to the Lord, as a sacrifice, and the Lord honors that sacrifice. sexual intercourse isn't a need. a lot of human beings stay with out it. a lot of human beings could desire to stay with out it, alongside with people who're in common terms fascinated in little ones or little ones, or people who in common terms have a style for brutal, violent intercourse. all of us anticipate sexual deviants to administration their sexual appetites. that's going to be far much less annoying for a mentally healthful man or woman to administration theirs.
2016-12-16 19:28:33 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
The director of the Catholic League protested against Griffin's remarks. The Catholic League is a lay organization and is not officially connected with the Catholic Church. So, you are in error when you say that the Catholic Church is at all upset with Griffin. In fact, I would wager that most Catholics do not know who Kathy Griffin is, and are not aware of her comments. I should add that if Kathy Griffin was trying to be funny, she failed miserably.
Abusive priests are an abomination, and Catholics are rightfully outraged by those priests and the bishops who mishandled this crisis. That being said, we know that 99.9% of all Catholic priests are good ministers of the Lord, and are faithful to the vows of celibacy.
Peace be with you.
2007-09-17 08:15:51 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
I am a Catholic and haven't heard a thing about the Church being angry with Kathy Griffin. On the other hand, I have heard plenty about the clergy sex scandals.
Therefore, I am having a hard time believing the Church cares more about whatever Kathy Griffin did than the clergy sex abuse.
2007-09-17 01:53:33 · answer #4 · answered by Daver 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
The Catholic Church is not more upset with Ms. Griffin than by abusive priests. Abusive priests are a deep wound in the Church from which it will take years and years to recover.
In comparison, Ms. Griffin's remarks are but a ripple on the sea. However some people felt that they just had to use their freedom of speech and protest her offensive remarks.
In her speech, Kathy Griffin said "A lot of people come up here and thank Jesus for this award. I want you to know that no one had less to do with this award than Jesus," an exultant Griffin said, holding up her statuette. "Suck it, Jesus. This award is my god now."
Ms. Griffin has the freedom of speech to say very horrible things to insult many millions of people. But those millions of people also have the freedom of speech to tell Ms. Griffin that her speech was insensitive and offensive.
The Catholic League, an anti-defamation group, called on the TV academy to "denounce Griffin's obscene and blasphemous comment."
The Academy of Television Arts & Sciences agreed and said in a statement, "Kathy Griffin's offensive remarks will not be part of the E! telecast."
Can you imagine the uproar if Ms. Griffin had said Allah or Muhammed instead of Christ?
http://www.comcast.net/tv/index.jsp?cat=TELEVISION&fn=/2007/09/11/760303.html&cvqh=itn_griffin
With love in Christ.
2007-09-15 13:04:58 · answer #5 · answered by imacatholic2 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
And isn't there the verse in the Bible about getting the log out of your own eye before you try to take the sliver out of your neighbors'...?
Just some food for thought...
2007-09-13 15:48:45 · answer #6 · answered by cbmultiplechoice 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
You are very poorly informed. The Church in the US has been taking very aggressive actions since the priest abuse scandal, even though it involved less than a percentage of their priests. Kathy Griffin's insult is news, it just happened. What don't you get?
2007-09-13 13:45:28 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋
who is she.Stupid me. Google.
2007-09-13 13:40:45 · answer #8 · answered by Near of DN 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Catholics are not saved Christians. They are an unsaved cult. Cults do weird things.
2007-09-13 13:36:51 · answer #9 · answered by CJ 6 · 2⤊ 5⤋
Because they all like little boys and hate women!
2007-09-13 13:36:41 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 3⤋
I didn't know they were specifically upset with Kathy Griffin. How flattering for her. I can see why they wouldn't approve of her, but not why they'd single her out, unless she made some Pope joke or something.
As for the priests, it seems that the "problem" was known by many higher-ups and was effectively covered up for years by moving the known offenders all over the place, which may not have been the best course for the kids. At any rate it's not surprising that the Church is trying to move beyond the issue. I'm not saying that they've resorted to attacking D-list celebrities to distract attention from their own problems and reassume the posture of moral superiority; but it would make sense.
2007-09-13 13:36:37 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 3⤋