FishEaters Traditional Catholic Forums

Full Version: Choreographer of World Youth Day Flash Mob Posed for Gomorrist Publications
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2 3
i wonder if these rad trads would want their own past sins held over their heads in perpetuity.  some of them have serious pornography addictions. (which makes this kind of exposé REALLY hypocritical, huh?)  others have done -- and do -- even worse things.  you know, there is a reason for the privacy of the confessional.  our own sins and the sins of others should not be broadcast.  ok, this guy 'broadcast' himself -- but it was in 1986.  is he allowed to move beyond that?  or would you freeze him in his sin -- the wish of a demon?

do these rad trads understand what the sin of detraction is?  do they really understand the Jesus Christ of the gospels?  he HATED this kind of relishing of others' sins.  HATED it.  he singled out THAT sin for condemnation, while showing mercy toward those who had sins of the flesh.  yes, he told them to sin no more, but with nowhere near the vehemence he reserved for these kinds of detractors.

all of you hyperreligious detractors at angelqueen, cathinfo, and the like:  you stink in the nostrils of Jesus Christ.  and in mine.
(08-06-2013, 02:57 PM)guacamole Wrote: [ -> ]i wonder if these rad trads would want their own past sins held over their head in perpetuity.  some of them have serious pornography addictions.  others have done -- and do -- even worse things.  you know, there is a reason for the privacy of the confessional.  our own sins and the sins of others should not be broadcast.  ok, this guy 'broadcast' himself -- but it was in 1986.  is he allowed to move beyond that?  or would you freeze him in his sin -- the wish of a demon?

do these rad trads understand what the sin of detraction is?  do they really understand the Jesus Christ of the gospels?  he HATED this kind of relishing of others' sins.  HATED it.  he singled out THAT sin for condemnation, while showing mercy toward those who had sins of the flesh.  yes, he told them to sin no more, but with nowhere near the vehemence he reserved for these kinds of detractors.

all of you hyperreligious detractors at angelqueen, cathinfo, and the like:  you stink in the nostrils of Jesus Christ.  and in mine.

I guess that's why we kept getting pervert child molesting priests moved around from parish to parish...Move along I guess, nothing to see here...
Is he a priest, too ?

tim
(08-06-2013, 03:18 PM)Tim Wrote: [ -> ]Is he a priest, too ?

tim

Not that I'm aware of. My point was, yes, forgive the sin, but does that mean it's prudent to place the person in a position to give possible scandal, or worse, further sin? Can anyone tell me that if you just had to have "Dancing with the Bishops", there wasn't a Catholic "choreographer" available without the dubious past?
(08-06-2013, 03:22 PM)St. Pius of Trent Wrote: [ -> ]
(08-06-2013, 03:18 PM)Tim Wrote: [ -> ]Is he a priest, too ?

tim

Not that I'm aware of. My point was, yes, forgive the sin, but does that mean it's prudent to place the person in a position to give possible scandal, or worse, further sin? Can anyone tell me that if you just had to have "Dancing with the Bishops", there wasn't a Catholic "choreographer" available without the dubious past?

Better throw out Augustine's writings then.
(08-06-2013, 03:24 PM)Melchior Wrote: [ -> ]
(08-06-2013, 03:22 PM)St. Pius of Trent Wrote: [ -> ]
(08-06-2013, 03:18 PM)Tim Wrote: [ -> ]Is he a priest, too ?

tim

Not that I'm aware of. My point was, yes, forgive the sin, but does that mean it's prudent to place the person in a position to give possible scandal, or worse, further sin? Can anyone tell me that if you just had to have "Dancing with the Bishops", there wasn't a Catholic "choreographer" available without the dubious past?

Better throw out Augustine's writings then.

:eyeroll:
(08-06-2013, 03:27 PM)St. Pius of Trent Wrote: [ -> ]
(08-06-2013, 03:24 PM)Melchior Wrote: [ -> ]
(08-06-2013, 03:22 PM)St. Pius of Trent Wrote: [ -> ]
(08-06-2013, 03:18 PM)Tim Wrote: [ -> ]Is he a priest, too ?

tim

Not that I'm aware of. My point was, yes, forgive the sin, but does that mean it's prudent to place the person in a position to give possible scandal, or worse, further sin? Can anyone tell me that if you just had to have "Dancing with the Bishops", there wasn't a Catholic "choreographer" available without the dubious past?

Better throw out Augustine's writings then.

:eyeroll:

Hey mate, you're the one saying "does that mean it's prudent to place the person in a position to give possible scandal".  Augustine should never have become a Bishop with the past they he had.
(08-06-2013, 03:32 PM)Melchior Wrote: [ -> ]
(08-06-2013, 03:27 PM)St. Pius of Trent Wrote: [ -> ]
(08-06-2013, 03:24 PM)Melchior Wrote: [ -> ]
(08-06-2013, 03:22 PM)St. Pius of Trent Wrote: [ -> ]
(08-06-2013, 03:18 PM)Tim Wrote: [ -> ]Is he a priest, too ?

tim

Not that I'm aware of. My point was, yes, forgive the sin, but does that mean it's prudent to place the person in a position to give possible scandal, or worse, further sin? Can anyone tell me that if you just had to have "Dancing with the Bishops", there wasn't a Catholic "choreographer" available without the dubious past?

Better throw out Augustine's writings then.

:eyeroll:

Hey mate, you're the one saying "does that mean it's prudent to place the person in a position to give possible scandal".  Augustine should never have become a Bishop with the past they he had.

It's a fallacious argument.
The only valid question in all this is ---- has he repented of past sins or are they simply being ignored and glossed over.

There are many Catholics that have committed sins, but if they have PUBLICALLY committed them, then they need to PUBLICALLY repent before they should have a PUBLIC role or position in the church.
Pages: 1 2 3