WordWolf

I find it fascinating that both Catholic sources seemed to agree with each other just fine- but that the woman quoted earlier disagreed with both. They said that a married person was supposed to be physically faithful to their spouse and have conjugal relations with only them, and an unmarried person was to have no conjugal relations with anyone. (If I misread, please enlighten me.) I'm a lot less inclined to take her word on subjects. She's depicted the Vatican as some sort of den of illicit sex. There may well be some people doing something there, but I find it strains credulity to think that the majority of the hierarchy stationed there are all in on some illicit sex ring. Pope Francis was chosen, in part, because of his notable piety and his humility. He struggled with this sort of thing as a bishop and cardinal before becoming Pope, and "what to do about these priests" is something he's been very concerned about during his time as Pope as well. I'm not going to depict the hierarchy as all having the same virtues as Francis to the same degrees, but I just can't buy that the whole place is some sin palace. " Folks, when the Apostles were ordained priests and bishops in the Upper Room by Our Blessed Lord, every one of them who had living wives became immediately, permanently CONTINENT, if they hadn’t become so already. EVERYONE understood this up until not too terribly long ago. OF COURSE a man who is offering the Holy Sacrifice at the Altar is NOT NOT NOT having sex with his wife. OF COURSE he is living in continence." I've noticed, in my experience, whenever someone makes outrageous claims with no evidence to back them up, they often accompany them with "this is beyond question" or "it is obvious that" or "any educated person knows" or "only a fool would question the idea that". It's a PRETENSE at an explanation, and it's a DODGE. I'm going to skip the "Upper Room" stuff, fun though it would be, to keep the focus where it is. ACCORDING TO HER, as soon as JC "ordained" his leaders ("priests and bishops"), all of the married ones (which, according to her, was nearly all of those leaders) immediately and permanently ceased having conjugal relations with their wives. She offered no SUPPORT for this claim, other than to insist it was obvious it was true ("OF COURSE he is living in continence.") Considering her approach and positions, I would not be surprised if she just wanted the RCC demolished as an organization and its properties and assets sold off.

Ok, I'm aware that the common usage of "celibacy" and "chastity" is that they are synonymous, and that's what almost everybody means when they say either- no conjugal relations, period. I also know that they have not always been synonymous. I'd read- but not from a scholarly source- that "chaste" meant "no conjugal relations" and "celibate" meant "unmarried", and that one could be celibate but not chaste (unmarried but having conjugal relations), or chaste but not celibate (married but not having conjugal relations)- but the latter would be pretty strange. So, I just did a check on some other sources. Here's what they said. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- A Washington State University professor chimed in on this. https://brians.wsu.edu/2016/05/31/celibate-chaste/ "Believe it or not, you can be celibate without being chaste, and chaste without being celibate. A celibate person is merely unmarried, usually (but not always) because of a vow of celibacy. The traditional assumption is that such a person is not having sex with anyone, which leads many to confuse the word with “chaste,” denoting someone who does not have illicit sex. A woman could have wild sex twice a day with her lawful husband and technically still be chaste, though the word is more often used to imply a general abstemiousness from sex and sexuality. " The other 2 sources were Catholic sources. -------------------------------------------------------------- "Our Sunday Visitor Newsweekly" chimed in. https://osvnews.com/2015/01/14/celibacy-vs-chastity/ "The words are related but also have distinct meanings. Continence, in the wider sense, simply means “self control,” especially related to the body. It comes from the Latin continentia, which means “a holding back.” However, over the years, the word “continence” has also developed the more specialized meaning of sexual restraint or the complete abstaining from sexual intercourse. In this case, it is similar to a state of living as a celibate. Celibacy’s wider meaning refers to anyone who lives in an ongoing state of refraining from sexual intercourse. And in this sense, anyone who is unmarried should live “celibately.” However, a person could eventually marry and the celibacy would cease. More strictly, “celibacy” refers in the Church to a vowed, perpetual state of refraining from sexual relations that religious and priests undertake. Here the celibate state is ongoing and expected to be maintained for life. Chastity is the virtue whereby we refrain from all unlawful sexual activity and intercourse. It is a virtue all are called to have, but its manifestation will vary based on one’s state in life. Thus for the married, chastity means fidelity to one’s spouse in body, mind and heart. Any sexual contact with anyone outside of the marriage is adultery. Further, the viewing of pornography and fantasizing about someone other than the spouse is a form of unchastity. The use of contraception is also annexed to unchastity because it willfully excludes openness to the procreative dimension of sex. For the unmarried, chastity means refraining from any form of genital sexual relations, to include inappropriate touching, immodest or inappropriate conversations, the viewing of pornography, masturbation and sexual fantasizing." ---------------------------------------------------------- The National Catholic Register had something on it. http://www.ncregister.com/blog/jimmy-akin/what-are-celibacy-chastity-and-continence-9-things-to-know-and-share "These are informal ways of speaking that use these words the way they are popularly understood. In this piece, though, we are going to look at what these terms mean when they are being used in a formal, Catholic context. 2) What is continence? Continence refers to what people think celibacy and chastity refer to—that is, not having sex. The term also has other meanings, but in a formal, Catholic context, it means not using the sexual faculty. That includes not just ordinary, regular sexual acts, but all sexual acts. If you are refraining from any and all sexual acts, you are being continent. It comes from the Latin word continentia, which means “a holding back.” By the late 1300s, this had come to mean refraining from sex. More recently (in the 20th century), it has come to refer from holding back other bodily functions as well. 3) What is celibacy? Celibacy is the state of not being married. People associate it with the priesthood because, in the Latin rite of the Church, the norm is for priests to be unmarried—to be celibate. However, properly speaking, anyone who is unmarried can also be said to be celibate. It comes from the Latin word caelibatus, which simply means “the state of being unmarried.” 4) What is chastity? Chastity is the virtue of being sexually pure. It comes from the Latin word castitas, which originally meant “purity,” and which came to refer specifically to sexual purity. Chastity will take different forms depending on whether one is celibate or married, we are about to see." (etc, check the link for more.) --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I know they used to give tours of it because I took a tour of it. I still remember a few details that made an impression on me, faint as they were.

"Headaches are like resolutions. You forget them as soon as they stop hurting." "So far of those I've used, I haven't had much luck with any of them. Well, let's see what they say about this one. They tell you what it's ingredients are, and how it's guaranteed to exterminate every insect in the world, but they do not tell you whether or not it's painless. And I say, insect or man, death should always be painless." "Sam, this is the last time." "For what?" "For this. Meeting you in secret so we can be secretive. You come down here on business trips, the occasional lunch hour, and I wish you wouldn't even come." "All right, what do we do instead? Write each other lurid love letters? I can come down next week." "No." "Not even just to see you? Have lunch? In public." "Oh, we can see each other. We can even have dinner, but respectably — in my house with my mother's picture on the mantle, and my sister helping me broil a big steak for three." "And after the steak, do we send sister to the movies? Turn mama's picture to the wall?" "Sam!" "All right. Marion, whenever it's possible I want to see you and under any circumstances, even respectability." "You make respectability sound disrespectful." "Oh no, I'm all for it. But it requires patience, temperance, with a lot of sweating out. Otherwise though, it's just hard work. But if I could see you and touch you, you know, simply as this, I won't mind." "You've never had an empty moment in your entire life, have you?" "Only my share." "Where are you going? I didn't mean to pry." "I'm looking for a private island." "What are you running away from?" "Wh-why do you ask that?" "People never run away from anything." "The rain didn't last long, did it? [Pause] You know what I think? I think that we're all in our private traps, clamped in them, and none of us can ever get out. We scratch and we claw, but only at the air, only at each other, and for all of it, we never budge an inch." "Sometimes, we deliberately step into those traps." "I was born in mine. I don't mind it anymore." "Oh, but you should! You should mind it!" "Oh, I do, [laughs] but I say I don't." "You know, if anyone ever talked to me the way I heard — the way she spoke to you..."

"Headaches are like resolutions. You forget them as soon as they stop hurting." "So far of those I've used, I haven't had much luck with any of them. Well, let's see what they say about this one. They tell you what it's ingredients are, and how it's guaranteed to exterminate every insect in the world, but they do not tell you whether or not it's painless. And I say, insect or man, death should always be painless." "Sam, this is the last time." "For what?" "For this. Meeting you in secret so we can be secretive. You come down here on business trips, the occasional lunch hour, and I wish you wouldn't even come." "All right, what do we do instead? Write each other lurid love letters? I can come down next week." "No." "Not even just to see you? Have lunch? In public." "Oh, we can see each other. We can even have dinner, but respectably — in my house with my mother's picture on the mantle, and my sister helping me broil a big steak for three." "And after the steak, do we send sister to the movies? Turn mama's picture to the wall?" "Sam!" "All right. Marion, whenever it's possible I want to see you and under any circumstances, even respectability." "You make respectability sound disrespectful." "Oh no, I'm all for it. But it requires patience, temperance, with a lot of sweating out. Otherwise though, it's just hard work. But if I could see you and touch you, you know, simply as this, I won't mind." "You've never had an empty moment in your entire life, have you?" "Only my share." "Where are you going? I didn't mean to pry." "I'm looking for a private island." "What are you running away from?" "Wh-why do you ask that?" "People never run away from anything." "The rain didn't last long, did it? [Pause] You know what I think? I think that we're all in our private traps, clamped in them, and none of us can ever get out. We scratch and we claw, but only at the air, only at each other, and for all of it, we never budge an inch." "Sometimes, we deliberately step into those traps." "I was born in mine. I don't mind it anymore." "Oh, but you should! You should mind it!" "Oh, I do, [laughs] but I say I don't." "You know, if anyone ever talked to me the way I heard — the way she spoke to you..."

Hypocrisy was pretty much the name-of-the-game for vpw. He could expound for hours on the love of God and even "the love I have for you", then turn around, embezzle the money, and drug and rape the women he just said he loved. The words he spoke were NOT from the heart. vpw taught that in his inner circle, too. lcm documented how he felt offended if he saw vpw even pretend to do any physical work around the grounds. In reality, a little cardio would have done vpw a world of good, especially with all the alcohol and tobacco he was ingesting. His heart needed help. As he was going, it probably would have given out on him if he hadn't already been dead of cancer. (For those who forget, he smoked A LOT for decades, and drank a lot. Tobacco is known to cause cancer. Alcohol is known to weaken the immune system. vpw claimed that he got the cancer from bright studio lights- which are NOT known to cause cancer, otherwise we'd have stage actors dropping dead of cancer all over the world. The closest thing we have to "bright lights I used for 1 1/2 WEEKS gave my eye cancer" is reports that people using WELDERS and BLOW TORCHES have an increased risk if they're used for several YEARS.)

Allan: "Jon Nessle from CFFM has done one of the best teachings on JCING that I have heard since being out of twi...from memory it's called 'Who is this Jesus Christ' " WW: "Ok, so one guy taught one good teaching. Are you saying we should be joining his outfit as a result? I'm unclear why you brought this up specifically, especially in this thread. " Allan: "No, I said one guy did a GREAT teaching on JCING (imo)...and no, I did not say anything about 'joining' anything...I must say I'm quite surprised you of all people 'double misquoting' someone else !! peace brother" WordWolf: So, once again, "I'm unclear why you brought this up specifically, ESPECIALLY IN THIS THREAD." I see no connection to the actual discussion. Was this just a commercial for his teaching? Was this just a commercial for his group? Was this just "I felt like saying that, so I picked this thread at random to post it"? Why did you bring this up specifically, especially in this thread?"

Back in the 80s, I remember someone at a local fellowship, in a conversation, mentioning a Christian who wasn't in twi. "She's born again, but she's not a believer." Other person replying: "She's a believer- she's just not a Way believer." So, that distinction has been around for decades, and, yes, from the top came "believer means in our group" whereas some locals knew better.

It certainly would help avoid problems like "It says 'mortify' and that means 'to blow to smithereens' and 'the difference in meaning between 'thoroughly' and 'throughly' is...." and other issues that resulted from teachers whose grasp of English wasn't as good as they thought it was.

In a sense, it's already bankrupting the church. There's a one-two punch that's causing the problems. 1) Maintaining an unmarried priesthood. IMHO, if they opened up the deaconate more (deacons can be married but they're not priests), it would partly address the problems to the RCC as a whole of unmarried priests. (Not enough candidates, I don't think I can serve and be celibate, etc.) This would take some pressure off the need to keep people on the books. 2) A lax attitude on priests caught abusing the flock. The RCC should be the ones HARDEST on their people breaking the rules. The whole idea, centuries ago, on having them separate was to try to ensure local leaders wouldn't just trump up charges and accuse innocent priests. So, if he's caught, he's tried in-house, and may wish he was tried outside. (As it is now, priests caught can be defrocked/depriested, and then handed over to the civil authorities.) The current pope takes this issue very seriously, but I don't know what will be done- or, indeed, CAN be done. He's up against centuries of inertia whenever he tries to change anything, and there's hardliners who want to go "up" whenever he says "down," So, how is it bankrupting the church? Fewer candidates for leadership positions, young people who don't think the RCC has a place for them, and so on. Fewer people in the pews, which means fewer of everything.

[quote']"...if Mother Teresa had graduated from the Corps program, for example, do you think that either VPW, or Craig, would "Ordain" her as a Reverend or a Pastor in the Ministry? Or, do you think these guys would refuse to Ordain her because she couldn't successfully lead and manage a Fellowship?...."[/quote] ======================================== ======================================== ======================================== They might do any of a number of things. Then again, as people qualified to judge who should be ordained, both fell FAR short of the mark, and I would sooner trust a roll of the dice to determine suitability than either of them. vpw might have ordained her- if he thought she was hot and thought he could get into her pants that way. Knowing what we know of her, I suspect he would not ordain her, because he would think of her as neither "someone he could have sex with" nor "someone who could sell the classes and twi experience." I know lcm got all his "training" from vpw, so I'd suspect many of the same answers from him, but I'd be less certain of what he'd do, especially since he became erratic during the 1990s. Why should we care if either of them would think someone was suitable for ordination or not?

Ok, so one guy taught one good teaching. Are you saying we should be joining his outfit as a result? I'm unclear why you brought this up specifically, especially in this thread.

The ONLY kind of actual "training" that twi used, as in, administering a professional curriculum and taught by someone who understood the material- was in SALES. vpw had them use the Dale Carnegie sales course to teach the Corps. As you might expect, he plagiarized it and never paid the copyright holders to run the course, not even once. That showed vpw's priorities. More than anything else, he wanted a trained SALES FORCE, not a trained group of MINISTERS.

Ok, a series with a few revivals, where the actors changed with every episode. That narrows it down by a lot. Is it "THE TWILIGHT ZONE?" (If so, Billy Mumy played the same character in the sequel to his episode, in the series which was a sequel, in the episodes "It's a Good Life" and "It's Still a Good Life.")

BTW, what makes a "leader" depends on who's defining it. If one thinks "a leader is not a boss, and a leader cares about the people while a boss just bosses them around", then there are not as many leaders out there since many are bosses. twi provided great training in how to boss people around. It did NOT provide training in how to LEAD because vpw knew how to boss people around, and avoided ALL programs that would have taught him to LEAD, whether in college, or after, or outside of a school setting. vpw had neither background nor training in actual LEADING, so he couldn't pass on what he himself didn't know. When looking at lcm's biographical snapshot of vpw, when lcm thought he was showing what a great LEADER vpw was, he was exposing what a BOSSY BOSS he was. When something was unpleasant, vpw was quick to insist that OTHERS had to do it, and NEVER led by example. "Here, I'll do it and show you how"- something vpw NEVER said about anything difficult or unpleasant. He was quick to yell at others and claim it was to TEACH them or TOUGHEN THEM UP if asked (which was rare enough.) So, for the amount of people who were trained by twi, the number of actual "LEADERS" is pretty small, and fewer still if you count those who climbed to the top of the twi hierarchy. There were probably lots of good LEADERS in local homes running "fellowships" and maybe branches, but above that, you were climbing the ladder. In twi, that was the result of ambition, which, IMHO, doesn't mix that well with actual leadership ability. If you count "leader" as "one who vaults to the front, monopolizes the microphone, and tells people what to do," then that's a different story. LOTS of those people were groomed by twi to do exactly that, so there's plenty who decided to continue that after leaving twi. IMHO, that was the rule, not the exception, the higher up the twi ladder people got (of course, there were exceptions.) So, if "confidence and demeanor" are considered critical for "leadership" (i.e. "he looks and sounds like a leader, and that's good enough for me"), then twi produced many "leaders." If they're a nice ingredient but not as important as caring for people and making wise decisions, then they are not. Getting back to JAL, he's got a proven, PUBLIC track record of making unwise decisions in the context of leadership. On the other hand, he looks confident and has a casual demeanor. Does that make him an AWFUL leader, or a FANTASTIC leader? That's up to whoever is asking.

This way, he "gets the best of both worlds." Ex-twi who care already know who he is/was. Nbw's who would react negatively to hearing that his training came primarily from imitating a plagiarizing rapist don't hear about that. His silence on where he was taught is common for ex-twi "ministers" who want to remain in charge. And, yes, this way he gets to make it about him and not about wierwille.

Well, if you're doing it silently, it's not like they have to know. You can do it through most of the Mass and all of the homily and nobody would know- unless you sub-vocalize or something so your lips move.

So, not overly obvious to connect to the Air Force, nor exist as an expression previously even unconnected (like "hot dog" or "mustang" or something.)

Ok, next movie. "Headaches are like resolutions. You forget them as soon as they stop hurting." "So far of those I've used, I haven't had much luck with any of them. Well, let's see what they say about this one. They tell you what it's ingredients are, and how it's guaranteed to exterminate every insect in the world, but they do not tell you whether or not it's painless. And I say, insect or man, death should always be painless." "Sam, this is the last time." "For what?" "For this. Meeting you in secret so we can be secretive. You come down here on business trips, the occasional lunch hour, and I wish you wouldn't even come." "All right, what do we do instead? Write each other lurid love letters? I can come down next week." "No." "Not even just to see you? Have lunch? In public." "Oh, we can see each other. We can even have dinner, but respectably — in my house with my mother's picture on the mantle, and my sister helping me broil a big steak for three." "And after the steak, do we send sister to the movies? Turn mama's picture to the wall?" "Sam!" "All right. Marion, whenever it's possible I want to see you and under any circumstances, even respectability." "You make respectability sound disrespectful." "Oh no, I'm all for it. But it requires patience, temperance, with a lot of sweating out. Otherwise though, it's just hard work. But if I could see you and touch you, you know, simply as this, I won't mind."

Thanks for answering about facing the congregation. I think you missed, however, that I also asked what difference the Latin makes, if any, in your opinion. (Unless you refuse to answer, which, of course, you can do if you want to- but I don't think that was the idea.)

Johnny D- no, I can do better than that.... Mary Stuart Masterson Heaven Help Us Wallace Shawn

*wild swing* Val Kilmer?

All I've got so far: - The current show is the 4th iteration of the show. -It's airing on Netflix or Hulu or something like that. - the title is some AF pilot expression, like "Top Gun" or "Hot Shot" or something along those lines. (SNAFU, BOHICA....)

One difference, AFAIK, between the new Mass and the old is conducting it all in Latin vs all in the language of the people (except for certain things the priest does almost silently.) Another difference is in the priest facing the congregation vs facing away from the congregation. In your opinion, do those make a difference, and, if so, what difference do they make?

Here was a thread on Personal Prophecy... "Step Right Up, Get Your Own Personal Prophecy" Here was a thread on Momentus... "CES and Momentous." Here was another, "Momentus"...