Oral and Glass Houses

As a catholic, I have to put up with our treacherous hierarchy. So some time ago I checked on the Anglican blogs. Man, was it interesting! Have you ever heard a catfight. Multiply the fight by the millions and you have Anglican blogville.

Of course, one blog stands out. I won't name it because tthe 'owner' is well---I hate to say it---not too stable and he might get depressed---for the 500th time.

There have been some comments on the death of Oral Roberts on the blog I'm writing about. But, and this is amazing, the blog owner can't see he is the Anglican oral. Why?

Well, first he runs a prayer site. His followers run to their computers and type "Prayers ascending." As of this time, God apparently has not caught the ascending prayers. Just like Oral, this blog is a bit fuzzy as to what has been achieved by the ascending prayers.

But the blogger is a siamese twin of Oral in soliciting money from the faithful. And get this!!!You can send him money for his "ministry" using PayPal. Yeah, that's right!!! Now at least Oral and most of the TV preachers decided a few years ago to reveal their finances--of the ministry, that is. But not this Anglican blogger. He doesn't give the faintest hint as to his collections and where the money goes. Just like Oral in the old days. Send me the money. Don't ask questions!!

Now, I don't know how his Church views this sacred panhandling. I know his blog "community" loves it. The blog owner, at times prints one of his sermons and the "community" literally faints with excitement. The "community" is well worth studying. There's a witchy old lady in the southern states of the US, and a ango-catholic in Chicago, I think, who feed the blog owner's ego in extremis. Oh Yeah, the blog owner ignores Bach, Mozart et al and is madly devoted to Rock-and-Roll.

So get to that blog and have a merry Christmas. Hey don't forget to send that money---by Paypal.

Who might need therapy???

Suppose you are a psychologist and two 15 year olds come to you for advice.

Joe says God has personally called him to live the rest of his life serving God and told Joe he must never have any sexual thoughts whatsoever, never be physically attracted to any male or female, never fall in love, believe women are a temptation to rightiousness, never desire to have children as that would be to slight God.

Jim says he is physically attracted to another boy and desires to have sexual contact with him and has thought of his friend while engaged in personal sexual activity.

Which of the two boys--Joe or Jim--would you think was in danger of developing a "personality disorder?"

Vocations and Callings

Football has distracted me from blogdom for a time, but I want to return to some thoughts about religion.

It is interesting to see that 'religious' persons are almost constantly involved in condeming those who do not agree with them to zillions of years of punishment. The reason religious people spend almost all their time wishing the worst for others, not of their faith, can be found with a little reflextion. The precepts of religion deal with things not subject to rational analysis. This does not mean that a person should not have religious beliefs(we all do), but it does mean that religious beliefs are just beliefs---they cannot be proven. Therefore every absurdity has been held important by some believers. After all, I can believe in the perpetual virginity of Mary, BUT in no way can I prove it to be true.

As a Catholic(sorry "Mr. Mole" you's just have to put up with me), I really don't get very bent out of shape by the doctrine of infallibility. Our church was challenged by science and modern thought in the 19th century, so thy propounded the doctrine that the Pope could not be in error on matter of faith and morals----in other words religion. And the fundamentalist protestants assure us that everyword in the Bible was correct, no matter how ridiculous.Both Catholics and many protestants were telling us there was NO way their beliefs could possibly be in error. So the hard line catholics believe some freakish little Italian (Pius 12) and a former Nazi soldier HAVE to be right on all serious matters of religion. And, Oh, those Bible believeing Christians!! They find a few lines in an ancient book and say it MUST be true because God dictated it. So some of us Catholics (like "The Mole") assure us that any one who defies the Guy in Rome with the red shoes is facing eternal damnation, and possibly may have a very hot future for eternity. And the Bible believeing group says we WILL face the same future, possibly,if we don't believe every page, every word in some old texts. BTW most other world religions have the same fights.

And since we really don't KNOW about the "other" world, most religions feel quite free to make something up to help their cause.

So I want to say a word about "vocations". Almost all preachers, priests, ministers like to inflate their own image by claiming that some being ("GOD") has picked them out as his fovorites and set them above all other people. Protestants use the word "called" and Catholics use the term "vocation." No one I have ever heard of can define these words. Here's the logic: A young man decides to become a priest;ergo that proves he has a "vocaton."A protestant chooses do be a minister,ergo that proves he was called. Somehow this seems backward to me. I prove I was "called" or God gave me a "vocation" just because I choose a certain occupation. After all did God, defined as omnisient, not in time, calls priests and ministers who have a strong proclivity to, for example, sexually molest young kids.

Now this is a special problem for us Catholics. To serve God in the highest. I must never "fall" into love with a member of the opposite sex, even have sexual thoughts. and , of course, not be bothered with those pesky children. B16 even praises those who LEAVE their families to be more favored by God. And this from your "family life" self appointed protectors.

Now, I'm not putting down priest , pastors, preachers whatever. Probably most of them are helpful. (I should note that a disproportionate number of homosexuals are 'tapped' by God to be Catholic priests. But since "vocations" come from a world we really can't know--just believe--I won't argue God's judgement here. )

We've all known priest, pastors, preachers , ministers. I think their professions are arrived at quite normally. They become interested in religion, they usually like to help people, they want to make a better world. Great. But to end on a sour note some of these guys and gals have other interest---like the body parts of the young. But nothing we can know is this world is perfect.

s

Assumptions. We just say they are true. So they are?

Football season is here, so I've been away for a few days. But I have three topics I want to introduce here hoping I would get some kind of rational answer.

One. We use the word "God" in our vocabularies almost every day, but ,to be honest, I, and we, I suspect, have no idea what we are are talking about. Supreme being. What does that mean? It's just another way to say "God." The "creator." Means what? The ground of all being???And we could go on and on. I challenge anyone to define "God" without just making the definition more complex. And what is our relationship to God? Does he talk to me? Does he tell me what to do? Does he occupy space? Does he think? Does he have a brain? Etc.

Two. The "creationists" have pretty left any intellectual ground they stood on. So scientist and rational people agree. So I think we've cleared up biology. And almost no biologists or educated people even argue with the creationists anymore. Is the same situation prevailing in philosophy/science. Do the "new theists"seeing the triumph of science and its approach, find the field empty--- do these "new theists" have the field to themselves. So we get Keith Ward being considered seriously. After all, Ward and his group, like the "creationists" try to find something unexplained by science and then say that proves God. Ward, for example, fools a great many by finding something in Kant that can be twisted a bit, and alleluia, that almost proves theism.

Three. What in hell do we Catholics mean by "vocation."? The argument apparently means that God calls each of us to do something. In other words God tells me to be married(the bottom), single-celibate(one step up) or a priest(the highest "vocation."

The three things I've mentioned above have become such common assumptions that we don't even discuss them. I think I'll touch on each in the next few days. Be fun for me.

From Lorry Driver to 'Prophet.'

There's this curate in England who is finding saving souls a bit of a drag. He wants more money. I can tell him how to hit it big, but he won't let me on his blog. I know the curate and his gang(losers mostly, but not all) come here at times. so out of my Christian charity I'm going to tell him how to make it big.

Let's start with the problem. The curate gives pretty good sermons, but they don't really "hit" you. They're a bit dry, but the gang loves them. As far as I can tell, no one has been struck by the "spirit" because of his sermons. So first he needs to "jazz up" these sermons.

You say how? All the really successful preachers, from Donne to Wesley to Billy Sunday to today's TV evangelistic preachers have their story. AND YES, this poor curate has a story. Sure does!! He was once a lorry driver just for starters. The lorry driving priest. Okay, just a starter. But it gets your attention. Then he had some kind of mental breakdown and was in an asylum(or hospital) for months or years or something. Hey, getting interesting, don't you think!! From the straight jacket to the altar. Now he is really going. And get this: his runs the foulest mouth blog to be found!!Well, a little titallation(get it) always helps. Now on top of this, he hates the Church he works for!!

Okay, he gets his gang to set up a TV talk show with his gang members as guests. The gang members have enough crazy stories to put Ophra to shame!! And he's on his way. Flooded by requests for speaking engagements.

Now you think this won't work. Look at a guy named Father J... He is literally worshipped by many because he has a STORY. He stole cars, was into drugs, apparently homeless for a while. So what did it get for Father J... Well, many Anglicans seem to think he has almost divine wisdom. Hundreds(okay, maybe 50--but that's a big number in Angliland) are looking to him to find the way out of the desert.

So mr. curate, get off your duff and hit the airwaves. Ask your members to send you "faith gifts" for your mission. Just make up a mission; tithe to the "missions" and keep 90 percent for yourself. Hell, you've beged for money before to support yourself.

Listen father, you've got everything going your way. Don't blow it.

From the Asylum

It is popular today among some to make fun of the "logical positivists" and people like A.J. Ayer. But their ideas are still needed.

So a multiple choice question:

The following quote was written by whom?

"Without eternal life (for all sentient beings) whether anything exists or not is irrelevant. Things only exist because they do. There is no reason for existence."

Anselm
Aquinas
Wittgenstein
Hume
Hagger

Extra credit for anyone able to explain what the quote means.

Four Anglican Blogs.

I basically follow 4 Anglican blogs. Two are okay---one very good---and the other a bit grouchy.

Two, however, I get a feeling , at least to a degree, of a desire for self promotion. One, run by an English curate seems to be nothing but a "say I'm the greatest, most brilliant, most clever person" the reader has ever run across. A long history of mental illness, and a complete flop in his career may give him some latitude. He allows no discussion, bans any who see though him and contents himself with what he thinks are "snappy" remarks. He can get boring becuase he repeats many of his snappy remarks. He also hates the United States probably because his general failure in life makes him want to blame anyone, besides himself.

The second self-promoter is a guy known as Father J... He tried real hard to peddle a book he was going to write about his somewhat sleezy youth. But you can't make it selling, say, 100 copies. His latest ploy is to analyze the Anglican dispute. Father J...and his coterie think he would have some real insight on this matter because he once was a car thief and a druggie. Now what that has to do to make you an expert in ecclestical history is something known only, apparently, by his cult.

But we can learn from Father J... In the future we should look only for supreme court justices in the U.S. who have commited felonies and spent at least some time in the "big house."

MP and Tracie--Freedloaders of the Year

Yah, I know it's boring, but I just can't get over Mad Priest. A few weeks ago he showed he was totally ignorant of the meaning of 'freedom of speech.' He had to be called out by, among others, Big Jim. MP didn't know as much about the concept as an average 7th grader.

Now ole Tracie, who should know better, jumps in the health care debate knowing nothing about the basic principles, insisting that others pay her medical bills so she can freeload off others. MP jumps in with approval of Tracie's nonsense. Showing again his ignorance.

You know I feel sorry for Ms. MP. Not only is she married to the town 'looney toon', but the town idiot all rolled into one.

So Tracie reveals herself as "freeloader" of the year. And, of course, we knew MP also has that title as he asks people to pay his living expenses so he can play blogs. Well, as he said 'blogging is my life.'

The Sacred Priesthood and its Servants.

I have had "comment moderation" for a few days while I think through for myself a couple of matters. Let me start with my church,Catholicism, and the struggle going on in the church today.

The problem is not about sex. I think it is clear to anyone that the hierarchy of the Church is totally and completely against the exercise of ANY form of human sexuality. Yes, even the last finger hold by Catholic liberals abortion, is just a sub topic under the church's anti sex attitude. After all abortion, to the hierarchy is is just the extreme form of birth control. Sex must have consequences, the Church clearly teaches, and abortion is just a way around the consequences to church leaders. I have argued this before many times on my blog. I'm tempted but will not repeat the argument that abortion is bad in all cases is nonsense.

The real'battle' in the Church today is between the laity and the priesthood. Ever since Vatican2 when the laity was given some recognition, the clergy, all the way from the pope to the bishops, has been in a desparate struggle to retain their supremacy and to place the laity back in its place as non-essential element of the Church. The laity in the Church today have no function other than to support the priesthood. This is harsh. But the Church is nothing other than a concord between priest and God, with the laity allowed to fight for a few crumbs from the table. Does anyone really believe B16 or Chaput and a large number of the American bishops, at least, have even the vaguest regard for the flock. Or is the 'flock' simply to be used as the foot soldiers of the 'shepherd'? No, the 'shepherd' has always been the essence of the Church and the 'sheep' are left to receive what largesse the "shepherd' can spare.

Why does the Church concentrate, with considerable success on the abortion issue, the only issue the church shows any interest in today. Quite simple. The hierarchy portrays all who oppose its position on this issue as co-conspirators in murder. You can see the ploy. We. the Church leaders, are against murder. Those who do not follow us on this issue are co-conspirators in murder. The Church then is sacred; all others are evil doers, except for those who follow the totally strict Catholic, priestly, position on abortion. After all the Church alone offers the "intellectual" undergirding of the anti-abortion movement.

So the question today for any Catholic is simply: Shall I remain loyal in some way, or by some semi=rational argument, such as the Church is not the priesthood, to the Church's clear teaching than only those who totally abstain from sexual thought or activity can have any role, except as servants to a celibate priesthood.

The point is obviously clear. The priesthood must maintain control; and one of the easiest way to do this is to insist that only total celibacy allows one to know God in the fullest. Those who engage in any sexual thought or activity are, by those very thoughts and acts, inferior to the sacred priesthood.

Comment Moderation

I have never used "comment moderation" before. I am going to use it for a few days only, I hope, because I want to concentrate on a couple of issues for my own information. Any comments I get relative to the two subjects I need to concentrate on will be published. Those comments not relative to my post will be held and published in a few days.

How do you want to be cooked??? Authority in religion.

We all recognize there are many types of "authority." Like the policeman, the judge etc. And, of course, intellectual aurhotity. Science, history and so forth. But just a word or two on the principal authorities in religion. Each has its place I guess, but each has consequences of a staggering nature. So beware.

The authority of the church. This is pretty much Roman Catholic territory. If the Church says it that has to be right. Dangerous, No. It simply means anything the Church (RC) says has to be true. So you doubt Mary floated physically up in the air, say, 20 billion miles; well forget it ,bub, Pius 12 said she did; so if you doubt it just get on to hell!

The authority of tradition. RC's and Anglicans kind of like this. After all if somebody 2000 or later years ago said something and somebody still believes it, it must be true. Even Keble kind of liked this authority. The problem is thousands of people said thousands of things thousands of years ago so....hell just pick and choose.

The authority of the Bible. Sure it tells you to kill your neighbors at the drop of a hat, but listen you smart ass, God wrote IT and who do you think YOU are, p...ant!!

The authority of the Holy Ghost. Let's see YOU make people fall on the floor and bark, or laugh for a month without stopping. Just turn on your TV you fool!!!Let's see YOU talk in ancient Brokadolian!!

Well there you have it. Doesn't it say it Legituris 5:18 "And the scoffer shall be grilled well done.!!!"

St. Jake and MP. Someone has to gain.

We still have a few characters to fill out Mad Towers. But plenty to choose from, so we'll take our time.

In the meantime I want to know who else might be benefitting from the Anglican raucus. Two that are active right now are Mad Priest and St. Jake) (he stops the world).

MP has created quite a congregation by jumping in very early--blog wise--on the LGBT Anglican war. Indeed his disciples seem to be believe his blog has changed the direction of the 40 million Anglican Church--excuse me--communion. He was so successful in the minds of his 'neighborhood' that he started to solicit money over the internet to support his ministry which was, of course, himself. I've dealth with this before. He finally stopped soliciting through pay pal--it got to be embarrassing. I think MP hopes that if the "communion" breaks into 50 peices he might get to be maybe even a rectum and not have to remain as a lowly curate.

Now we have a new scavenger apparently looking for financial gain from the Anglican cat fight. I call him St. Jake as a tribute to the reverence in which he is held by HIS disciples. (Actually MP and St. Jake have basically the same disciples they compete for.) Anyway, Father Jake is now pushing a book on his blog. He's trying to be a bit more subtle than MP by asking for suggestions as to what he should write about. Now shucks; if an "author" ask my opinion you can be damn sure I'd buy the book when it came out!

Jake kind of favors an autobiography. Kind of Like "The Cross and the Switchblade"(remember Pat Boone?) and "Run Baby Run" (remember Nicky Cruz?). It's been done before; indeed you can't find a fundamentalist Christian church that doesn't have a preacher or youth minister who wasn't a former 'druggie', gay, gang banger, hood etc. But Jake just might bring that "I was saved by Jesus from nastiness" business back once again.

One thing Jake has going for him is the giant picture of himself on his blog. He certainly looks like a movie star...well, okay a 1930' "B" movie star. But heck, you can't have everything.

I'll keep you posted.

Mad Towers. Mrs. Mad Priest

Big Jim at Mad Towers

Yesterday, the editor and I tried to sketch in Tracie for the Mad Towers book/movie. We noted she was a real character, but somewhat 'damaged by her over lush attitude to the Master or MP. But this attitude toward the Master is not confined to ladies. (Sorry Susan S. We just don't have room for you). For example, we have Big Jim, we'll call him.

Recently he posted the following on the MP blog: "Brilliant both of you, absolutely brilliant."!! Now, if you're MP, could you ask for more!!

A little background. When I was working on my doctorate in philosophy, a current joke was: If you are in a philosophical debate and you may not be winning say,"Well, of course, Duns Scotus, is definitive on this matter." You win. Your opponents don't want to go there because no sane person knows or can figure out what Duns Scotus was trying to say.

Well, how does that work out with Big Jim. Say he's at a cocktail party in Illinois, his home state. Just for a moment over scotch someone mentions they are a Methodist; another volunteers Catholic; a third chimes in with Jewish. Big Jim opines "I'm Anglo-Catholic."WHAT??? the others wonder---better get on to the Cubs and Whitesoxs. Message: Don't bring up religion around Big Jim; you may make a fool of yourself---after all what is Anglo-Catholic?? Is it something like "scientology?". Someone told me there were three Anglo-Catholics in Illinois. Still the best definition of an Anglo-Catholic: 'Let's dress up and play like we're Catholics.'

Give me a break!!!

Big Jim has a blog. He uses 'comment moderation.' Probably be better if there was a 'comment immoderation' button. Not allow any moderate comments. It'd sure liven the place up. And maybe he could stop saying 'my little blog' all the time.
We know that already.

In the book/movie we see his character as a kindly, pipe smoking eccentric living on a little, insignificant acreage next to Mad Towers and acheiving what recognition he has by at least being acknowledged, on occasion, by the Master.

Tracie the Red...Mad towers must have.

The editor and I have been struggling all morning with the Mad Towers character "Tracie the Red" She IS the only female member of the 'neighborhood' that exudes even the faintest aroma of sexuality. (Da-Veed has the male 'scent' to himself.)

But we do have our problems. She 'opens' her blog, then closes it, then 'opens' it, then closes it and on and on. Hard to get a consistent persona.

Then the "Joe" thing. Who in the hell is Joe?? Her husband, her boyfriend(I'm being nice), her brother, her bishop? (Yes, bishops are looking for jobs, mainly in Africa.) Just don't know. She fights with Joe like cats---excuse me--- Anglicans.
Once we had a whole series of 'fights' dealing with The Red trying to get Joe to go to a job interview at some restaurant, I believe.

And then, we can't tell, is she a wicken(sp?), druid princess. Unitarian-Universalist---assuming there are distinctions. BUT, she hangs around with Anglicans. Well maybe that isn't an inconsistency.

For the movie we would have to work on a facial 'tic' she has. That is, she is always saying "roll eyes" in her writings. Of course that could that be an imitation of a Sarah Palin wink?

The biggest problem in determining her persona is her relationship with MP, the master of Mad Towers. When ever she is around him she literally drools with praise/admiration of the Master. I'm not at all suggesting "eros", but possibly "agape?". At times, cruelly, the Master mercilessly berates her. Some have suggested he found out she had bought a Richard Dawkins book and caused the Master to have a seizure!!

So yes, we must have her in book and movie. We still have to clear up "A Guy Named Joe" Mimi may remember this mid forties movie.

BTW, we have contacted Doris Day to see if she might be available for the Tracie role. We could do her in VERY SOFT focus.

DOXY!!!! Mad Towers

The editor and I have a tough one today. For some reason I can't get to "Doxy's" blog. You notice I am not using the first part of the blog name because I can't get in for some reason, so I'll try to reconstruct the character. If I attribute something to Doxy and it came from someone else let me apologize to the "someone else" right up here.

I first came across Doxy in the "neighborhood" when she told a 20 year old friend of mine she had never met he had a small penis?? How she knew this, I don't know, but it's quite a good and useful gift for any women.Then she started to give a day by day count down to her upcoming marriage. It was sort of like the ball dropping in Times Square to bring in the new year. Finally the day of her marriage arrived and the dropping balls must have falling right on her thighs. She had always referred to the man she was marrying as "Dear Friend." That's the only name I know of her husband. Some told me she did yell "O LORDY...." when the balls dropped a few hours after the wedding. What that meant I don't know. Maybe a replacement for "dear friend." BTW there were pictures of the wedding reception, but I can't remember seeing Doxy; it seems like all the pictures were of Mimi.

Anyway she has a reputation as a tough cookie. She once told about her son, from a previous marriage, and his friends talking in front of her about "yanking off" or "whacking off. That shocked me. Can you imagine when you were in your teens and your mother told you to do your homework and you replied"Sure, but let me yank off first--just take a few minutes."

Of course I'm way too wimpy. But do you like to think your parents"did it" before or after you were born? Disgusting!! I refuse to believe Queen Elizabeth has BM's. And the Pope falling in his bathtub!! Dirty proestant lie. His Holiness has NO bady parts---he is just a head on top a white cassock! He doesn't take baths; they send him to the dry cleaners!!

The big scene in the book involving Doxy is the Library Scene. A little background. The ladies of the Mad Tower neighborhood meet once a week in the Mad Tower library to discuss a religious/theological book. This has been going on for years. So far they've read all of C.S. Lewis's books----each one at least 15 times. In fact that is the only writer they have read in their book club. After all, forget Kant, Hegel, Hume,Spinoza---hell, all you need to known was a baby named Jesus was born a couple of thousand years ago, and C.S. Lewis proves, without any doubt the baby grew up to be God, or the Trinity or the "ground of all being"--you name it--He's IT. Few know this, but word reaches me that Mad Towers has, in a silver and glass case, the tongue ofC.S. Lewis. Yes, and it has not deteriorated one bit!

Well one day recently the club met to start the 16th reading of "Mere Christianity." AND, get the drama, Doxy shows up with a copy of "Lux Mundi!!!" A fight ensues. Tea cups are knocked over, some of Mimi's tea leaves are trampled, one of the ladies faints but her life is saved because her head strikes a needlepoint Jane Austen pillow that has fallen on the floor during the scuffle!!

And then as Doxy flauts out to go back to Dear Friend or OH LORDY she screams: AT THE NEXT MEETING I'M BRINGING "FROUDE'S REMAINS!!!!!!"

Mad Towers.A hint of sex--Da-VEED.

I met with the Mad Towers editor today and we worked on an important character for the novel. Da-VEEH.

This is a tough one. The editor said we couln't go with this character. There are no Anglicans in Mexico. It would be like having a Mormon living in Vatican City or a communist Christian Scientist. A little research indicated there are one-and- a-half Anglicans known in Mexico. The one-half is explained by a transvestite who lives there who when in a male mode is a pedophile catholic and in his/her female mode is an Anglican priest(priestess?). We still have to solve the problem of whether you call a female priest "father."

Da-VEEH's occupation is not clear. He sometimes refers to himself as a psychologist, then sometimes a "psychiko". Some research reveals he is a enematologist at the local hospital. In the book, however, we are going to use him for just a smidgin of sex. After all he is about the only person even suggesting sexuality in the MP neighborhood. His kind of 'titilating pitures on the MP blog--especially the half naked one he once used--always draws favorable comments from the ladies and---okay I'll say--by some men of the neighborhood. Umm?

In the novel he will be the Mad Tower master's "houseboy." In 'real' life and in the novel he will be remarkably submissive.No, no, we're not going there!!! Once or twice he's had the temerity to be misunderstood by the Master. The Master gets carried away; issues a few semi-racial rebuffs, whacks him up the side of the head, and then Da-VEED comes crawling back like a peasant in "Viva Zapata."

"Mad Towers", the novel and movie, will have the ladies talk to each other at times about 'forbidden love.' A tea drinking, Jane Austen lady attracted to the young latino. Of course, nothing will "really" happen since, baring a failure to sell Mad Towers as a movie, maybe the BBC or Masterpiece Theatre will pick it up. Probably only the older crowd---Mimi, for example---will remember Sabu---a 1940's movie exotic. But will think about this a little more.

If we ever get to the movie stage my wife has already developed a scene. Da-VEED wakes up in the morning clad only in underwear. After all "real" men---even English MEN(if there are such) don't sleep in 'jammies'. DaVeed gets up, looks in the bedroom mirror, and exclaims with a pronounced Mexican accent: GOD...am I BEAUTIFUL!!! If we have any left over 'cuts' from the movie we'll send them to the MP blog. For a price, of course.

Mad Towers. Mimi

To move on with brief sketches of some characters from the soon to be released novel "Mad Towers"(BTW, I own the movie rights) we come to who must be considered the principal antagonist, Grandmere Mimi.

This "lady" lives in one of the most primitive states in the United States--Louisianna. This state ranks near last in medical care for the inhabitants(significant later) and is governed by---you won't believe it---an Indian(the country), Roman Catholic convert, EXORCIST, who--hold on--has a pronounced "gay" wrist!!

Probably sensitive to her location on the globe, Mimi desperately covers herself with a more exotic patina. Where possible she 'drops' a little French---she recently fell in love with bete noir---devoting a whole essay to such "Noirs". Her optician is in New Orleans, of course. For her descriptive theme, she uses the first words of Mimi's aria from La Boheme, "Mi Chiamano Mimi". A touch of Italian. Not too much though. Those Italians are such crude Papists.

But her real dream, hope, prayer, is to be metamorphised into something out of a Jane Austen novel. She apparently reads these over and over and ---just a suggestion---might be available to do an Austen character in full costume at your lesbian ladies garden club. She is a anglophile, refuses to sing "My Country Tis of Thee", instead substituting, in all instances "God Bless Our Gracious Queen.!" And the mark of all English gentle ladies--TEA. The rumor is she would prefer the Sacrament be changed TEA, not wine. After all, God is a gentlemen! Should she get this desired reform, the TEA would have to be made ONLY from tea leaves, brewed by the special Colonel Hard---excuse me, Grandma Mimi formula. Watch for these fey "Tea" discussions and run!! Yes, men do LOVE to discuss TEA. Well, at least some.

This love of the old country extends in her worship of, at least some form, of Anglicanism. We have to say "some form" today as the differing groups fight to the death. Next to her devotion to the LGBT cause, this is her life. She once travelled to England to be 'received' by the Master of Mad Towers---a supposed curate---to receive his benediction. (Do Anglicans get benedictions, kiss rings etc; probably a bit crude for The Church Of Good Manners. )

Her early writings were accepted, but only took off when the Master of Mad Towers suggested she spice things up for todays readers by throwing in some "naughty"(tee hee) words and to openly discuss and refer to, at every chance, the male reproductive organ--OPENLY, with suggestive pictures.. In addition a slight change to your local bar-maid attitude (like 'I don't take no crap,bud') has greatly increased her readability.

And pictures!!! She loves them, especially of herself. To my knowledge she has been photographed from some quaint village in England to the "gay"--excuse me, the Episcopal General Convention--streets of San Francisco.

As to her friends, most seem to be in some serious health or accident problem. By my calculation, she spends close to 15 hours a day in prayer for others. Of course, she doesn't guarantee cures, but is probably the closet thing we have 'overhere' to Lourdes. I have heard, but with no proof, that she plans to put Louisiana swamp water into small containers, as a cure for hemmeroids.

I must close by saying she has incited the envy of some bloggers by being the subject of a rather good caraciture. Unfortunately it is sometime paired with some Rasputin like 'wacko.'

So all the way from singing at a pentecostal church to queen of the queens in just three or so years. Not bad, eh? Okay, cheap shot. Her work for the LGBT community is her real glory. REALLY!

Amor ti vieta.

MP on the run.

Brief Notice. MP is on the loose again!! As Louis said about Conn: He can run, but he can't hide.

The New Trollope. Mad Towers and MP

My favorite 19the century novelist is Anthony Trollope. As critics have pointed out you can't always remember the plot of his novels,but it's the characters that live with you.

Well, Trollope is gone so what do we do to find such 'memorable' friends. In this age of new and faster forms of communication, I go to Mad Towers blog. The characters are rich in slight quirks and are a delight to follow. Where else can you find Mimi, Jim, 'doxy', DAH-veed, Elizabeth, Tracie, IT and so many other hard to forget characters. In the days ahead, I shall attempt very brief sketches of the above and others. They will not be offended if a posibly unkind remark slips in due to misinterpretation; they do not read this blog---which gives me a good deal of latitude.

But first, a brief introduction to the master of Mad Towers. We actually know very little about him, but his general character is rather easily determined by reading his writings. We know little about his physical bearing since he apparently uses a flattering caraciture on the pages of his journal. One suspects that he is older than is shown and, based on a remark here and there, a bit more...porcine?

He is married to a desperate or saintly librarian. He loves to call himself Mad Priest, possible as a preemtive strike. Mad, as used here, has two possible denotations. Mad, as in mentally unbalanced; mad as always angry at the world in general. The best critical guess would be a combination of both uses.

MP, as he is sometimes called, tells us in one of earlier writings (indeed in a sermon) that he was confined to a mental institution(I hate to use the 'old' word asylum) for several years . He clearly is not writing of mild depression or bi- polar syndrome but a catatonic state brought about by fear of the world outside his cell---excuse me, room. At some time---it is not clear---he was released. As they say about cancer, you are never cured, but just a survivor. The left overs of his problem are still apparent as his writing clearly show. He still presents, to a degree, an exaggerated fear for his shaken self image by striking out, often to an extreme, at any who do not lavish him with praise---even including the members of his "community" or his "neighborhood" as he now calls his cyber friends.

As to the second meaning of "Mad," this is confirmed by his blatant striking out at the church he works for. After many years as a curate in the Church of England---a curate being just an assistant---not a vicar, much less a higher status---MP, in his resentment, should be a prime candidate for an "anger management" tutorial.

From the two "madnesses", MP likes to see himself as the first cyber prelate. To achieve this status he, until recently, kept a constant plead for money at Mad Towers, usually as he admits for his own use. He has now dispensed with his "love gift" appeals as even his most devoted followers thought it was in bad taste.

But there is good news. MP needs a support group. We all do. Most find such a group from their families and friends. Lacking these, apparently, he finds his support in the cyber world. And a loyal and kind group they are. The basic routine is this: He 'posts' something and is showered with acclaim. If the acclaim is not great enough MP lashes back with a blistering response. The recipient of the response (maybe with a touch of masochism) or fear, or kindness follows up with an abject apology.

Now those who think we might see the beginning a cult here, may be right. But hold your judgement, till we can examine some of the characters in his world. Is MP the new Jim Jones(of mass suicide fame) or the new Trollope?I lean to the latter.

Your best chance to live forever in the sky.

Ever since I took an interest in religion, I always thought there were two issues in Christianity.

One. Who was Jesus or the Christ? Part man, part, God, preexistent, part of the "Trinity" and on and on.


Two. What did this Jesus, this Christ, tell us to do?

You kind of divide religions on which on these two does a Church or an individual emphasize.

Well, I come down on number two.Basically for two reasons.

One. All the metaphysical discussions about who Jesus was---a God, part of a God, part of a trinity, is all just human speculation. Oh, sure you can get fancy and say Jesus/God is the "ground of all being." But what does that tell anybody?

Two. The second, with some disputes, can clearly be found in what he said and taught. Even that is not completely clear. But it seems like a good start.

So let's say you want to be "saved" or live forever in the sky somewhere. Will that be decided on what intellectual conclusions you draw and have a good, a very good chance,of being wrong. Or to get down to the "nut cracking" will it depend on what you do,based to a degree on what the man Jesus said to do.

Living forever in the sky is problematic at best, but I'm going to guess you have the best chance by acting, not just thinking.

Oh, I know most churches like to say it's what you believe AND what you do. But my money is on the latter as your best chance to get to the forever sky(heaven, I believe we call it).

Blog help. Don't be fooled.

We all know, of course, that there are actually no enforceable rules in "blogging." Every day, it seems, new blogs appear. So here are a few helpful tips for you new to the blogosphere.

One. If you see a good blog, bookmark it so you can get there fast. I have 5 bookmarked, so its a breeze to check them out each morning.

Two. Find out from other bloggers what blogs will "ban" you if you don't agree with the blog owwner. These are the blog "hiders"and "scaredy cats." There is usually something fishy about the blogs that block.

Three. Be careful of the "comment moderation" blogs. They only want you to" gush" over the owner.

Four. Don't waste too much time with blogs that are used by strange people to form a support group for themselves. One I know is a former inmate of insane asylums.

Five. If the blog has nothing but wild praise for the blog owner, you're wasting your time.

Six. BE VERY CAREFUL of bloggers that solicit money---some just for their own pleasure and use. You can't get all of these "moochers" on TV,but there's at least one blogger who begs you to give to the "cause"----himself.

Seven. And some of worst blogs actually set up PAYPAL accounts.

Eight. Watch out for bloggers who are always talking about "trolls" and use the word "boring" to describe other bloggers. This is a blog trick used by some blog owners out of fear they'll expose the blog owner as a bit of a scared patsy.

Hope this is helpful.

Kindly advice!!!

I'm trying to be helpful. So....

If you have no real friends.

You've spent a good deal of your life in an insane asylum.

You're at about the lowest level in your profession.

You have no career prospects. No one wants you.

You apparently have no kids.

You're totally self-centered.

You're married to a librarian.

Try to break up the organization you belong to because they see you're kind of "off the rocker." And you might find work with a part of the group that breaks off.

Very helpful. Okay

Well, here is what you do. Start a blog. Tell people you're crazy. Get their sympathy. Only allow those who think you're 'something' to contact you. Ask for money to support you, 'cause you can't make it very well on your "job." Specialize in hate comments.

See, it's easy. Now you can say my life is my blog.

Fey Fashion and the Anglicats.

You know I had hope for my old religion---Anglicanism. Saint Jake and Mad priest were a bit too much, but at least the latter erased a real tacky response to me.

But then the Anglicats blew it. MP ran a 45 comment discussion on "proper vesting". Kind of like something Jesus would talk about. Sure.

Then the gang joined in about some one who wore a "chasuble over rochet(sp?) and chimare." And they were off to the races. Each commenter struggling to comment on the 'proper' fashion dressing of an Anglicat priest. Man it was so "fey"(I don't mean LGBT) that it was hilarious. And you wonder why people don't take this group seriously anymore.

Sure the Anglicats are out front on some important issues, and on the right side. But this little fusion of fey fashion under the guise of religion was just TOO much.

But on the bright side they do love animals, especially cats. We should all care about these guys but "proper vesting"----give me a break!!

Join the RIGHT club. Excuse me,CHURCH

Recently I have been hanging around some Anglican blogs.

And of course they think they have the best liturgy and the most freedom according to Map Priest. That's fine. After all you don't belong to a church if you think its liturgy is crap and it holds you as a slave and won't allow you "freedom." In other words we all belong to churches we think are the best. If we thought there was a better one we would go join it.

Now to a lot of non-christians, Christians are just a Gagel(sp?) of quarelling nerds arguing about can three people be one, can wine really become blood if you say just the right "magic" words over it, did the creator of the entire universe write a book. when I'm cremated will I be put back together in maybe a billion years, are we more holy because our words at church are more 'poetic' than some others, can gays do the trick with the wine and bread and on and on????

Do Christians do anything that my atheist friends don't do? Or maybe less?

Look at Saint Jake. He spews hate for all who don't think just like he does. He doesn't even want to hear from them. Because? St. Jake says they can't be right unless they---well consider him, St. Jake, inerrant, infallible or any other term you want to use to show you know it all. Hell, the Catholics just come out and say "Our church can't make an error in matters of faith and doctrine." But isn't that idea, "we are the 'rightest', "what all the Christian groups say about themselves.
I had a friend who became a Roman Catholic because when he was down those wicked "papist" were really nice to him. They helped him. Silly boy. You don't chose a religion on that basis. If you do You had better watch out. After all it is our duty to belong to the BEST church---meaning our group .

Peace breaks out. Clear conscience.

This should close the little dispute with MP, his "community" and the "Saintly":() Father Jake.

I have posted in almost direct quotes the situation that arose on MP's blog about a question from a young man. No 'friends' involved in this disagreement have made any effort to refute what I have written. Yes, there have been some ad hominem replies but nothing other than that. The "principals" all know what I have written is correct.

I do not want to restate what I have written before. Any one who would review the whole disagreement would see the truth.

So let me say in closing. The people I have named in this matter know what was said. I think their attitude is: "Well, I got out of control a bit and then told a couple of fibs about it. But basically I am a good person." Let me say, I agree. As far as I can tell from the blogs they are good people.

My conscience is quite clear. If the people I have mentioned have a clear conscience on this matter, then we all are in good shape.

Question for Tracie.

Question for Tracie the Red.

I hate to do this since you have family illness.

But I do need to ask if you made any comment about the 'small penis club' to the young man who came to MP blog and ask about "touching himself?"

Did you also follow up on your own blog with less than complimentary statements about the young man?

Did you later erase all comments on this subject from your blog?

Mark vs Mad Priest---Wormwood doxy questions.

It is quite clear that this discussion is being followed by Mad Priest and his group. To this point, but I will wait, MP has made no response to specific points; it appears that finding quotes they have looked up in books is the strategy to "cover up."

So let's go to "wormwood doxy."

One. Did you state on MP's blog that that the question ask by my young friend was 'inappropriate' because he had not studied the MP blog long enough?

Two. Were you aware that my friend had ask several times if he could ask a question on the MP blog?

Three. Were you aware at the time that the young man had ask and been encouraged by a MP regular, to post his question?

Four. Did you state that the young man was like a person 'breaking down your door, coming into your house uninvited, placing his feet on your table, and asking for a drink?'

Five. Did you, or anyone you know, say the young man was a member of the 'small penis club?'

Six. Did you not state a few days ago that the young man had come in your house to discuss 'yanking off?'

Your response, please.

Mark vs. Mad Priest. Part one.

To continue.

One. Mad priest denies he was aware of any dispute with the complainant over comments on his blog over this matter. A review of his blog will clearly show that to be false. More than one complainant wrote to his blog. HOWEVER the same email was used and could easily have been checked.

Two. MP claims he never 'erased' on his blog any posting or comments on this matter. This is clearly false as a review of his blog will show.

Three. MP has stated several times in emails to Mark that the latter is mentally unsound. He offers no proof but his statement which, unsupported by any qualified person,cannot be given any weight.

Four. MP himself has admitted to a lengthy period of mental illness, including several institutional stays for treatment of mental disorders. His mental condition as of today is not documented.

Five. On several occasions MP has admitted his dissatisfaction with his career status in his religious denomination.

Six. MP rather consistently until recently solicited money from other bloggers for his personal use

Seven. It is quite possible that MP hopes, considering his present discontent, to gain career and monetary advantage should the Episcopal Church in the U.S. and "liberal" Anglican churches in England form some type of alliance.

Obviously MP or his agents are reading this, so an answer to each complaint should be made. Not however by silly "school boy" quibbles.

Next a few questionsfor Wormwood doxy.

"Mark" et al vs. "Mad priest" etal

I must, reluctantly, return to the case of "Mark" vs. Mad Priest, Wormwood doxy, Tracie the Red, Father Jake, et al.

Now we all know that in Western society methods have been developed to arrive at the truth when a disagreement arises. This method is basically the method used in courts of law. Now, we are talking "blogs" in this situation, such blogs not , in actuality, being subject to either common law or statutory law in most cases. However, the methods used to find the truth in courts of law can be quite useful in resolving any dispute, inclusing blog disputes.

To avoid over writing we can refer to the compainant as Mark, which includes Jack, Alice, Frank, Hugomar, Sheldon.Their complaint is joined together as they all use the same email address and in fact are an older man, his wife, and two younger friends of Jack and Alice. Since this is a joint complaint the just mentioned group will be refered to as "Mark" except where necessary to distinquish the different parties. The "defendants" included above will be refered to as MP except where necessary to specifically identifiy a defendant.

The complainant "Mark" et al, contends that "Mad priest" et al have made false and inaccurate statements about him, and, in addition, have clearly implied that "Mark" is engaged in unsavory behavior. "Mark" contends that "Mad priest"et al have known about and conveyed to others false information, clearly knowing such information to be false.

Before this matter is further examined a few elementary elements of finding the truth through a formal process should be stated.

One. There is no evidentiary value in using "color" words. Thus calling someone a "troll" id totally irrelevant to the matter under discussion.

Two. The number of "supporters" of each side as shown by a calculation of the "commenters" has no evidentiary value.

Three. Making statements with no effort to document them should be dismissed.

Four. While this blog matter has no legal standing the invoking ot the so called 5th amendment against self incrimination cannot be used by the defendant in that he has waived by action such protection by making an issue of "Mark" credibility. There both sides are free to offer any argument based on the proven or admitted character defects of the other side.

Five. It is relavant to examine what personal interest each side might have in stating their case.

Six. Telling an untruth in a particular matter does not mean the statements of the person are false in toto such untrue statements may cast doubt on the truth of other statements of the person.

Seven. The fact that some of the defendants claim clerical status must not give greater weight to their statements.

As we continue, other maxims of a legal nature may be invoked as needed.

Ethics and Art---Standards or personal whim?

Three yeas ago when I moved from our rather spacious home to a condo, I had a problem. What to do with my large library and my classical record collection of over 5000 albums. I love my condo---it has plenty of space---but not for the library and music albums. I sold most of the books but had to eliminate the records. It was a hard blow!

But here a few weeks ago I discovered youtube. And there they were---many of my favorites AND in video.

I never understood how people can love great literature, for example, The Book O Common Prayer, and then have their favorite music rock and roll and other inferior drivel. But they do.

Just two of the many favorites I have found:

Schumann's Piano Quartet, op.47 ,3rd movement.
Bach's opening chorale of his cantata "Wachet auf."

Later I may post on the absurdity of having 'standards' in ethics and wallow in the gutter in music. Arnold did say seek the highest and best. Some do this in ethics but trash its axiology twin, aesthetics.

There ARE standards in the arts. But most just say "it's all just a matter of personal taste" Should we apply that to ethics?

Two Priestly Blogs.

Because my blog is kind of a personal reflexion of my thoughts, for the past week or so I have wanted to get into some great music I've found on youtube. But I keep tangling myself up in the current "Anglodrama" over who or who should not be clerics. Basically two priestly blogs are center stage it seems.

But let me back up a second. The philosopher T.V. Smith wrote 'we become what we do not just what we think.' His prime example was
Russian communism since Lenin. Lenin and his cohorts had what might be called laudable goals; but they tried to achieve them by unsavory methods---thus eventually ruining their goal itself. What does this have to do with blogging???

Well, one of these priestly blogs is, in my opinion, doing more harm than good for the cause both blogs are seeking. Why? The 'bad' blog operates in a way which contradicts its supposed goal of tolerance and openess. It blocks those who have different views than the blog owner. It refuses to accept emails. It spreads false information about those it does not like. It centers way too much attention on praising the blog owner. It answers almost all comments with a sharp retort rather than any reasoned argument. It asks its followers to not tell the truth. It encourages obscene or at least off color comments. I could go on, but I think my point is clear.

The other priestly blog allows all to comment, excluding extreme obscenities, of course. It does not spread false rumors. It does not try to 'control' its followers. It does not openly solicit personal praise for the blog owner---in other words, this 'good' blog does just the opposite in method as the 'bad' blog.

Both blogs have excellent posts, mostly. Their goals are the same. But the methods to achieve the goals are in sharp contrast. The first of these blogs seems to have more followers. But as a 19th century statesman said. Men(Blogs) should be weighed, not just counted.

Loyalty and Truth--Which is the greater?

Mad Priest and I have been exchanging e-mails. I could analize them in detail but will pass that opportunity. So I have just one question.

MP stated in a comment on my blog that "That there never was a conflict." (With me or my son). "Nothing has been erased."

Now at least five of his "community" know that the statements above by MP are not true. Now just as a experiment it would seem some of them should come forward saying MP was mistaken. You know who you are.

Send me an e-mail if you recall the incident(s). I will not reveal your name or anything that would let people know who you are. This is just an experiment in ethics. I repeat: The e-mails will be private. Loyalty is a great trait; but so is truth.

Mad Priest Coverup. Part 5

Let me summarize this topic with a few thoughts.

One. As so many said about Nixon and the Watergate scandal: The coverup is worse than the "crime."

Two. It seems clear that my version of the dispute is essentially correct. I say this because it would be quite easy to show I was wrong by 'releasing the original exchanges.

Three. I believe the person who first made the assertion that my son had "plunged into her house etc." responded the way she did because she was not aware of the questions by my son as to whether he could ask a question.

Four. My son's responses were far less inflamatory than the charges leveled against him by the "community."

Five. We were not aware that one had to pass an 'initiation' examination to comment on the MP blog.

Six. I would suggest that a person be required to pee on a picture of Rowan Williams, and submit proof of such, to enter the outer precints of the "community."

Seven. I believe the MP blog is hysterically anti-catholic, and this may have played a role in the dispute.

Mad Priest Coverup. Part 4

Still a couple of more posts about Mad Priest. Those not familiar with their blog should know the purpose is to top each other with cutting, hateful remarks hidden behind "prayer lists." Assuming the prayer lists to be genuine, that is the only thing even approaching Christianity on the MP blog.

Now imagine the delight to "Wormwood Doxy" when a couple of young people dared to venture into her lair. Salivating would be mild. So she spewed all the venom she could muster before----piously returning to the "prayer list."

Now a day or two ago she made a feeble effort to respond to what she had obviously done. Trying to win the "mean" award of the day again she published what she said she had written back when the young people came to MP. She picked one of her comments, nasty enough, but nothing like her whole role in the incident.

She then righteously announced that whe would not discuss the matter again, althought clear proof exists part of her allegations are false. Then for protection she allowed no further comments from me. I wonder why?

Apparently she is married to some type of cleric. Let's hope he influences her rather than the reverse.

Be back tomorrow.

The Mad Priest Coverup. Part Three

Now, to the heart of the matter. I want to be fair. I am almost sure that the original negative comments were made by "Wormwood Doxy" and "Tracie the Red" There is a small, very small, chance, that another was involved, but the important point is the comments came from the "community."

Let me correct some possible misconceptions.

One. One of the above stated that my son had come to the MP blog without checking it out. This is totally false. My son, at my suggestion, had checked out the blog. Before he ask his question he requested several times if this blog might give imput on his question. He was encouraged to do so. This is clearly shown in the MP archives.

Two. My son ask a question for a just turned 20 friend of his. This was not my son's intended question. Now much ridicule has been made by "doxy" and "the red" that rather than use the word masturbation the term "touching yourself" was used. I have noted several times on my blog that my son had been sujected to severe physical abuse when young for masturbating. Indeed causing later medical problems. His young friend was raised a Baptist and was living with a Catholic family. Although the Catholic family made it clear they did no consider masturbation anything bad, the young friend of my son wanted to know what other religions might think. I then encouraged them to go to MP's blog since it advertised itself as dealing with "God and sex and rock and roll."

Three. After being encouraged by a "community" member to ask his young friend's question, "wormwood doxy" and "Tracie the red" came down on my son with full force.

Four. "Wormwood" I'm certain stated something to the effect that my son had no right to ask a question on this blog, because he had not checked it out. To repeat that is totally false.

Five. I am almost certain the "Wormwood" said something to the effect that my son was like a stranger pushing, uninvited, her door open, putting his feet on a table of hers and asking for a drink, indicating how outrageous my son had been.

Six. One of the two ladies refered to my son and his friend as 'spoiled rich brats.'

Seven. One of the two ladies, or both. refered to the young men as members of "the small penis society."

I am certain of the above. But the two ladies might say what provoked them to such rhetoric. Yes, a rather ugly exchange took place. For what it is worth, there can be NO question that one of the ladies cast the first stone. In a later post "Wormwood" said they were called "bitch." Yes that may be true, AFTER the first putdowns by the "community." "Wormwood" also said my son said something about someone having sex with another while standing in the communion line. I strongly deny this was said.

These are the basic facts as I know them. If they are not correct in essence, then they should be easy to refute by MP.

So, why do members of the "community" refuse to discuss this situation. Maybe they think it is not imporant. A definite possibility. But maybe they know they have not acted in the Christian way they proclaim. A definite possibility.

I will have a couple of more post on this matter.

Mad Priest Coverup. Part Two.

Well, what is an "internet troll?" Basically, in my opinion, it is anyone who disagrees strongly with a blog owner. The people who use this term, usually use it when they have no reasonable response to what the "troll"is writing. The Mad Priest crowd think calling someone a troll is all that is needed to emerge triumphant. So let's break it down.

The troll is off topic. My first comment on a blog some three years ago dealt with the topic of evolution. This blog had a very long list of posts he had written over the years. I got no response. Then an experienced 'commenter' responded to me a few weeks later saying I needed to comment on the most recent post. Many bloggers do not check comments on old posts. I did as he suggested and immediately started a discussion that had many comments. So, yes it is true; in order to contact a blogger my son used a current post to ask if the blog might have some answers. There was NO attempt to disrupt the thread.

The troll is usually anonymous or uses a fabricated name. Well, who doesn't. Those who most use the troll term against others almost always hide their identity. For example, many commenters don't even have a listed "profile." Others use names like "IT." What in the helldoes that tell us as to his real identity? I should point out that my son and I have given our real names, our city of residence and even the church we attend.

The troll tries to start arguments. That may be right. I do not comment on recipes for egg salad sandwiches. I do comment when I think the subject is of some importance to me and others. Yes, this may lead to strong responses.

The anti-troll yellers think nothing of deleting scores of comments if they are not right in line with the blog owners ideas. Mad Priest recently posted a thread that had over 80 comments. When I checked the following day he had deleted the comments down to 47---apparently not liking people disagreeing with him.

In sum then, a "troll" is best defined as one who comments in a way the blog owner does not like. His right, of course. But attempting to "win" your argument by labeling someone you disagree with a "troll"really doesn't cut it.

The Mad Priest Coverup.

I feel it necessary to use my blog to correct some imaccurate and misleading statements on the blog OCICBW run by Mad priest. Let me explain why.

Some 30 years ago, I was involved in a suit against the Board of Regents for Higher Education in my state. In preparation for the trial I met with the president of the most pretigious private university in our state. Moving ahead without details, he produced from behind his desk a framed map relative to the suit. Several months later at the trial, the president was asked about the map that he had shown me. Under oath, he denied such a map existed. Later this president died and was accorded universal praise from the citizens of the area. He deserved such praise, I guess, but I always wondered why he lied under oath.

Now today, I am involved in a minor squabble with Mad Priest and his "community" in a somewhat similar situation. My son and I, since last March, have been dealing with comments and statements which were made, but which no one will come forward and admit what they wrote. Before I get into the details like me touch on the 'conspiracy of silence.'

I have given the details under a blog "Youngcatholicfank." Let me say before I begin my post that it is possible, but highly unlikely, that I have attributed some of the remarks to a wrong person. I do not think so. But the attribution is not the key. We know what was said. Primarily two women were involved in the dispute. One going under the moniker "Tracie the Red" and the other "Wormwood Doxy."

Let me touch briefly on what I know of Mad Priest. He is an Anglican clergyman in England.. He and his followers consider themselves a "community"(their word.) Mad Priest has had some rather severe mental problems in the past. I do not say this to put him down, but to possibly explain the loyalty his "community" feels toward him.

Now in my first post on this matter let me explain why I believe this has turned into a rather harsh exchange. I have explained, as above, how this situation between the "community" and us has developed.

One of his commenters after our first contact with the blog suggested I might be a"troll." I will deal with this in another post.

Within a day or two, we were banned from the blog. MP directed his "community" not to respond to any comment we made. He then deleted all of our discussion, except a few he apparently overlooked. We,of course, wondered why the deletion was necessary? Was it to protect the "community." I don't know.

I offered to have one of the "community" review our exchanges and to abide by his judgment. No one responded.

I offered Grandmere Mimi to e-mail her discussing the problem. She refused, saying she would reveal my e-mail on her blog apparently so I could be called to task.My e-mail is always available. It is true I had critisized Mimi for not responding more strongly when 'put down' by MP. Mimi also barred me from her blog.

Wormwood doxy responded to an inquiry from me by closing her blog to me after, I believe, very strongly she had been inaccurate and incomplete in her initial reply.

"IT' ciritisized me about contacting him, and refused to discuss the issue after making a rather harsh judgment about me.

"Erika" showed interest in the situation of my stepson and then refused to discuss it further.

DA VEEH has made critical comments but is very difficult to reach. I did once but he does not have his own blog.

Now my request is quite simple. I would like the WHOLE exchange printed where MP would desire. If my statements and judgements are inaccurate in essence I WOULD BE MORE THAN GLAD TO EXPRESS IN THE MOST ABJECT TERMS MY REGRET. If MP and the "community' are wrong, I WOULD NOT ask an apology.

I must be honest and say I think MP and the "community" are involved in a "coverup." But let us see the record and let each decide.

More details later.

Abortion and the seamless garmet.

Anyone who has surfaced this blog realizes that I am Catholic. However, like most other people of faith, I find certain doctrines of the Catholic church, as most people do with their own church, very difficult to accept. The most obvious example of this is the Church's teaching on sex. Now since the Church, at least in our country, has elevated its teaching on this matter to the most exalted state, it is necessary to make some comments.
I have dealt with the issues of celibacy, contraception, masturbation, sexual thoughts etc in some detail. Also I have written that the stance of the Church on abortion needs to be examined. The Church position(at least the 'official' position) is that an abortion is an "instrinsic" evil and therefore supercedes all other Catholic social teaching is based, it seems quite clear, is based on the Catholic teaching of the "economy." The teaching of the "economy" is that religious/divine truth must not be revealed all at one time to new Christians in that these new Christians are not ready and cannot absorb the 'mysteries' in toto until later in their Christian experience. This, of course, was the argument between Kingsley and Newman which led to Newman writing his apologia.
Now we see this "economy" in play today in the Catholic position on abortion. The overwhelming majority of Christians, Catholics included, see a clear distinction between a few undifferented cells and a fetus just prior to birth. The question then becomes for almost all people as to when those cells develope enough to be called a "person." The embryo/fetus at the earliest stages has no traits of a person. No brain activity, no organs, no limbs and so forth. So these cells are not seen as a person by almost 90 percent of people.
But here comes the "economy'' or a slight variation thereof. The "average" person--the 90 per cent--are simply not capable of determining the line between a group of cells and a person. A debate on this issue would probably not be finally conclusive. So the Church teaches that the first cell formed after sexual intercourse is a"full person" just like your 3 month old grandson. No one really believes this, but as a wise mother, the discussion is ended says the Church. After all does not this position eliminate all the intricacies of what/when are these cells a person.
Now, I believe the Church has a very strong prejudice against sex in the sense that sex is an impediment to a full relationship to God. Obviously this is easily shown from the catechism and, of course, from the position that only celibates have any true authority in the Church. And, obviously, abortion is the final 'birth control.'
Now I believe the Church gives itself away on this issue when they take the position that the 'major' player in any abortion---the pregnant women---should not be punished by our laws. Even though the Church's logic, indeed its own statements, classify abortion as nothing less than murder. That a women who has an abortion is is guilty of "murder'' but is not responsible for such is clearly absurd.
Oh, but the Church says most women who have abortions do not realize it is killing a person. Therefore she is not responsible. But such an answer it to make things even more complicated. Does it mean that a woman's knowledge of biology is a factor in her guilt of killing a person? Does it mean that all people who support the right to abortion are excused? Does it mean that only the "right to life" people who have abortions should be tried for murder? Does it mean that since the Church teaches that abortion is murder, that only Catholic women should be tried for murder for having an abortion? Does it mean that since Catholic women have abortions at the same or greater rate than non-catholic, that the Church wants the state to enforce its belief on others? Or only on Catholic womem?
So what does it all mean to a Catholic like myself? Well it means the Church "fibs" a bit when it says one or a few cells are a"person" as almost all define a "person." Yes, I think the Church does "fib" for what they think is the greater good. And a believe such a teaching is part of the seamless garmet of anti-sex prejudice.

The Worst Blog

I have been blogging for going on three years now. I do not believe I have ever devoted a post to discussing another blog. However, at this time I feel I must call a blog to the attention of any who pass here.

The blog I am speaking about is run by a rather 'strange' Anglican priest who has gathered about himself a group of people he refers to as "the community." A support group. A strange group indeed. The apparent purpose of "the community" is to keep the priest in good mental health by catering to him in ways that are often embarrassing.

I have just had an exchange with one of his "community" in which the member uses every blog 'trick' possible to not admit she acted in an bizare manner. She did this by putting on her blog a small part of an exchange she had with me on the "community" blog. She did not respond to the more egregious comments she had made on the "community" blog.

Now, of course, to cover herself, she has cut off any further information or discussion. I know what she has done. I think she knows, but on the theory of some bloggers. the more strident your comment the more people will believe it.

The real sad thing about the priest's blog is that it claims to be about religion. Yet the attitude of the "community" reminds me of Newman's reply when ask to toast the Pope. Not the exact words but: I toast the Pope, but to my conscience first.

The motto of the community is: I toast the truth, but to my "community" first.

Yes, I will continue to go to the priest's blog. As Menken said:"Why to people go to the zoo?"

Sainthood for the "naughty."

As I have written, the "seemless garnet" of Cardinal Bernadin is really not about "life" but about "sex is bad." There are several aspects to the "sex is bad" garment. The Church is making a real effort to show it is into sex as much as...say Hugh Heffner. One track being taken is to 'show' that the Church recognizes married saints just like celibate ones. The only problem is, it doesn't.

I haven't done a statistical analysis but here are some clear conclusions and ideas that show the Church still is and has been in love(wrong word maybe) with "don't touch...don't admit" sex is BAD.

Looking at the issue of married saints,we find they make up at maximum about 3 percent of all saints. Of course, such a figure should tell us "case closed!!!" as my high school history use to say. But looking a little deeper we find that these married saints were usually married at 13-15 years of age. Usually through a forced marriage. Some tried to get their husbands to make a vow of lifelong celibacy. Reading their biographies we find that almost all desired a life of total sexual abstinence. In other words they definitely weren't into "doing it." My favorite a St. Cecilia who jumped out a window when her husband tried to "approach" her on their wedding night!!!

But let's be generous. Let's say a handful DID enjoy a romp in the hay. But let's be clear, when it came to their possible sainthood, it is almost impossible to find a saint whose "ability" as a wife was a factor in their saintliness.

Now Catholic apologists have an excuse for the overwhelming--over 97 percent--of Saints who found a little sex a real turnoff. Leaving out the clear teaching of the Church that any type of sex is a clear impediment to being "really good,"(a position the Church tries to hide today) the excuse is put up that married people don't have enough 'lobbyist,' as we would call them today to push their saintliness. The celibate order of the Church apparently having plenty of time to make up and circulate stories to get their members well on the road to sainthood.

So the lesson is obvious: If you know a 'married' man or women that might be a saint---well look around and find the best public relations firm you can find. Then a married saint, who was really married, with all that naughty sex might be considered good enough to affix St. in front of their name.

Priestly sex advice!!!

Any of you who have stopped here since I've had this blog know that the "seamless garmet" of Cardinal Bernadin was supposed to be about "life" issues. All the way from contraception to abortion to war to the death penalty. What I've heard of Bernadin he was a fine man.

But the Catholic "seamless garmet" to me is the SEX IS BAD garmet. I'll take that up in more detail tomorrow or so.

But before I start I must bring a little reaearch I've found on the Catholic attitude to masturbation. Or more directly, Catholic thoughts on how not to masturbate brought to you by the Inexperiened (or Experienced?) Catholic clergy.

My favorites:

One. When taking a shower, imagine worms are crawling up your legs!!!!

Two. Just discovered today, a priest's advice to a 13 year old boy masturbator.

A. Stay out of the shower.
B. Stay out of your bathroom.
C. Stay out of your bedroom.

These suggestions are not jokes!!! They come from a Father Groom(I think that was his name) on a catholic young persons answer site.

I should add most of the discussion on this subject deal with whether masturbation is a straight to hell(mortal) sin, or how many times you have to do it and what you are thinking about when you do it, to move it from the venal to mortal sin.

Keep this in mind for tomorrow's post. Mark

The Church of the Curious Cleric

There has been a lot of comment the last few weeks about the new world of the internet, facebook, twitter, blogs and other cyber developments that are changing our world in a real way. We see this in politics, world affairs, personal matters etc. But no one has mentioned to my knowledge these new developments on religion. But they will come---indeed we already have a model, at least, for the first cyber church.

So I'll do a brief tentative analysis and see what happens. I'll use 'cover' names to protect the---well, should I call them the innocent.

The founder of this cyber church, which I will call "The Church of the Curious Cleric," (CCC) is an ordained cleric in England. He ministers to a local church, but constantly complains because he has not gained the 'advancement' he claims he deserves. So, he apparently thinks, why not keep two jobs; one as a local cleric and, at the same time, start your own church.



But what about offerings, or money, as the laity call it? After all a church can't just exist on faith alone. Well, the CCC church displays at all times on its blog, the single word "Donate." Where the donations go and how much they are is a secret, known only to the Curious Cleric. However, unlike most religious appeals, the Curious Cleric makes it quite clear the money goes to him personally. A few months ago, he appealed for monthly donations to keep the ministry going. That has been dropped, and his last appeal was to finance his vacation.

The organization, or hierarchy, of the CCC is not fully developed at this time. The Curious Cleric does have a sort of assistant. This guy, from the west coast of the U.S.,is a rather tart 'young' man, who takes over when the Curious Cleric is on vacation. The Curious Cleric need not worry. This assistant worships his 'boss'; is never critical of the head cleric, and BTW has the fastest "delete" hands in blogdom should a critical comment come in. I suspect this assistant is gathering relics of the Curious Cleric to sell---well you know when.

Right under the assistant is the official blog inquisitoress. She lays down the rules of who can come on the Blog(church) and does this with icy efficiency. Even the Curious Cleric follows her instructions on who to "cast out" from the CCC. Recently, to the delight of the "communiy", as the members call themselves, this lady got married. I would be less than honest, if I did not say I pray every night for her......her husband!

Problably the most active member of the church is a granma who apparently only knows really sick people. She describes in brutal detail those getting close to heaven. The church prayer club then responds by chanting "prayers as--cending, prayers as-cending" at least 7 times, 7 times just to keep it Biblical.

Another important member is DAH-DAH. He used to appear in the church directory naked from the waist up, causing, it appears, squeals of delight from the faithful. He now appears with shirt.

The community, the church, whatever, does not speak in unknown tongues or have a 'prayer language. They substitute "naughty" tongues. The favorite word is some form of the F...Word. Some other 'frank' words are used quite often so that when they call someone asshole it just might be a compliment. Oh, I must mention a lady who identifies herself with just two letters. She's planning to be a writer, but is satisfied now to be the official church proof reader.

Maybe the above will give you a slight 'taste' of the membership of CCC. As of now, the church has no official slogan. On its blog billboard, it promises 'the deity, genatalia, and bad music.' in other words, of course. A pretty good draw, eh?

They have" high holidays"---they have just finished(maybe) having a month long celebrations of the Curious Cleric's birthday. One another distinctive trait: The catholics see the Virgin in their cereal , on their doors etc. The CCC members---and this is very distinctive---see human penises(should it be "peni") in everthing from trees to clouds; or just anything vertical.

I really felt I could not complete my religious survey without, As Obama says) looking to the future. Watch this CCC church. It is growing, and probably coming to your computer soon.

The Mega-Churches...Rest Stop.

Having finished my "Religion Rankings" for this decade, I must move on to a couple of 'rest stops'. So brief discussion of "Mega-Churches." These are hugh non-denominational churches, that are far more than traditional churches. They package religion in with a variety of other activites, to draw more "megas."

Some observer recently wrote that these mega-churches would not last---they would collapse of their own weight because they had no 'real' theology. Wish father to the thought, I'm afraid. Very few, if any, members of the traditional churches have any real idea of the theology of their denomination. Okay, maybe a few slogans, but that's it.

A friend of my recently returned from the "Mega-Church World Federation" and passed along a few suggestions that were made to draw new "megas" by using 'secular' techniques rather than the usual "come to Jesus, and save your ass" approach of the denominations. I'll list a few.

In Mexico a complete bullring right under the 'sanctuary'. Complete with real bull andweapons of bull torture.

In France, complete course in "French kissing" not just limited to the lips.

In Italy, free hot tub sessions with members of their parliament, including the Prime Minister.

In England, a bit reserved, so free tickets to the Prince William and Prince Harry nude picture gallery.

In Ireland, free molestations by your favorite nun or priest. Accompanied by songs by the "singing priests," or whatever they are called.

In the United States, drawing for a night of free sex with your favorite Republican figure. Or in the alternative a drug session with Russ Limbaugh.

In Africa, watch a stoning of a gay after the Sunday morning service.

Just a few great ideas. Guaranteed to increase membership in your mega-church.

And the winner is: Trumpet fanfare!!!! The Lutheran Church

Here we are at the top. And the winner is THE LUTHERANS. As an RC you can tell I, at least, try to be objective.

Before I start here , let me share my 'method.' In the past I've tried to visit the churches on the list. But age has a bit slowed me down, so Now I send my daughter and 'sons' to visit and take video, if possible, Otherwise audio. I know people in almost all the groups; however, as some know I am no saint---even close. Yes, I do bawl out the Jehovah's Witnesses and Morons(opps, typo, but I think I'll leave it) who knock at my door, and then I slam the door in their face!!

Now to the Lutherans. They have one PR drawback. The Church is named after a real person. AND he liked beer and sex.Possible in the future they should consider changing it to something like: "The original, most true,love God, your neighbor, pray for all, sermon on the mount brotherhood of the saintly from A.D. 31" or something along those lines.

Of course, every Christian 'church' thinks it is the ORIGINAL church. Baptist, for example refer to a couple of Paul's letters as "Paul's Letters to the First Baptist Church at Corinth." This is not a joke. I've personally heard such!

But the Lutherans rank right near the top in all the categories I use in these ranking. They have a well developed and coherrent theology, explicated by outstanding theologians. They display a good balance between personal and social ethics, and I have yet to see a really ugly Luthean church, in any size town.

On top of that, they get along well with other religions. Attention Anglicans: They even get along well with their break away Lutherans. In my conservative city, the Missouri Synod group are the leaders in ecumenical efforts. That's right--Missouri Synod.

Of the 'liturgical' churches their preaching is right at the top.BTW, does anyone remember Oswald Hoffman? The Methodist edge the Lutherans slightly in this area, if, as some do, you consider Methodist liturgical.

And most important: To my knowledge they do NOT use the pulpit to endorse specific political candidates, even by misdirection as do the Catholics, Baptist and others.

And, of course, finally, any church that produced the music of Bach has to be close to heaven!!!

And if your daughter wants to marry into this religion? Urge her to.

Well, there are my ranking for this decade. I still have two "rest stops." The mega-churches, and the First Church of Blogdom. Coming up.

United Church of Christ. The Kingdom Here.

Well, here we are. Just one more to the top.

TheUnited Church ofChrist(you'll have to check out its lineage) is the "And the second is like unto it, love your neighbor like yourself" in action. This group supports about every second commandment you can think of.

They oppose any war over 30 minutes in length, are leaders in about any social reform movement---opposition to war, tolerance and care for LGBT causes, animal rights, women's equality and on and on. It is, of course, not correct to say they support inter-species marriage AT THIS TIME--but maybe later.

When I was young decades ago our city was blessed with a Congregational minister---Jackson Smith---who was ahead even of the Unitarians on racial justice issues. That church now is a Unitied Church of Christ church.

Shouldn't this Church be at the top of my list. Well one drawback. They really don't give much attention to "The first and greatest commandment." Nothing really wrong about this; in fact this Church would probably deny it. But, at least, that is the impression of many.

Obama belonged to this church, but even he had to take a break because of its so open social/political agenda.

But since these rankings are based to a degree on religion, this Church probably needs to push personal, not social, piety a spot more.

If your daughter wants to marry into this religion, applaud her. Make sure she likes to stand on street corners protesting whatever is old and bad leading some of her friends to think she just might be a tad radical, and on the other hand some will think she is a Church of Christ(the ones that don't like musical instruments in church), so she made get it from both directions. But if she's tough and thinks about building the "kingdom" in America's grassy plains, then she sould be at home.

The Methodist---Right down the Middle

I believe my rankings are about as objective as possible. With the Methodist I have some problems of distance.

The city I live in has one of the amazing church buildings in American. The Boston Avenue Church is a marvel in that it is in a relatively modern style (art deco), but is as fresh and timeless today as when it was first built. In addition to the building, this Church has one of the two or three best 'preachers' in the U.S.

In addition to these parochical factors some ten years ago, I had the chance to see the Methodist church in Windom Texas. Windom today is as close to the 'end of the world' one can find. A town of just a few hundred, the "downtown" consisting of a cafe and a small post office. about two blocks away is the local Methodist church. It is a well designed frame church in the style of turn of the century country churches. The interior is immaculately kept with the altar communion vessels in perfect condition. To me, it is amazing that this tiny community hosts such a structure. It is helped, of course, by having across the street an ugly, concret block Assembly of God edifce.

Nationally there is considerable divergence of views among the Methodist. The National organization tends to the 'liberal' side especially on social issues. The Church has excellent seminaries, the clergy usually being rather learned. Unfortunately there is a sizable group of local churches that are still struggling to get past 1950.

The Church services have a decent balance. Liturgical in many ways---their inheritance from Anglicanism---but with usually a high order of semonizing. Not all, of course, have these two elements to a relatively high degree, but there is much there, in many Methodist churches to satisfy both lovers of liturgy and good sermonizing..

The theology of the Methodist Church is traditional Anglican, with a few deviations.

Now, if your daughter wants to marry into this group, she will neither gain nor lose socially. She will need to be careful not to fall into the hands of a right wing, political leaning church. Cerainly there are such Methodist churches, but, in my experience most pastors tend to steer clear of political partenship, disguised as the 'word of God.'

Getting Closer===The Presbyterians.

Getting closer to the top, we come across the Presbyterians. Historically they have a couple of big things to overcome.

One. They come from a Calvinist tradition. Which means there ain't nothing you can do---God has already determined whether he likes you or not. If he doesn't, you've had it. Everlasting burning. Well this isn't really a hot mission message so.....this isn't mentioned even on Wickepedia. By some fancy footwork the Presbyterians believe in predestination and don't believe in predestination. So they are a scholarly group.

Two. They gave the name and the intellectual cover for fundamentalism, early in the 20th century. But again they've dropped this. They don't want you to remember that W.J. Bryan was of their group.

In literature we think of Sinclair Lewis. Why? Because the Presbys were what he used to represent staid the middle class religion of the American businessman. Check it out in your home town and you'll find most of your bank presidents in the 20's went to the First Presbyterian Church in your village.

But they've changed a lot. Still a lot of boring businessmen, but with a new theology and social concern they are the perfect church for the respectable who don't want to get too far out on the liberal limb, but like to give generously to the Community Chest.

Their archetecture is solid and impressive. Ther sermons are solid, without either hurting your conscience or jolting you awake. Hey, next to St. Thomas, the Fifth Avenue Presbyterian Church inNew York is about as 'tony (toney? as you can get.

So, if your daughter wants to marry into this group, you should be satisfied. Good social standing, and rather light, but not totally dismissive, of issues like same sex marriage. A good fit for those who believe in God, but don't want to get carried away with the idea and do something that would keep them out of the Rotary Club.

Anglicans----COME OUT FIGHTING

Well, this hasn't been my decade. My current church--catholic--is sinking fast. My church for 55 years---the Episcopal, I'll call it Anglican here---was number one in my 1950 rankings but now has me a bit confused. But I'll try to clarify. 

First, to clear up a couple of fallacies:

One  It is NOT true that, as many said in the nineteenth century, the essence of Anglicanism is "Let's dress up and play like we're Catholics."
 .
Two. It is NOT true that there are more Anglican church buildings than members.

This church is 'headed" by some guy in England they call ABC. He spends a lot of time with a queen----of England, that is. He has about as much influcence over your local church as the janitor.(Excuse me, I think they call him the sexton?) And your bishop. You live in Kansas and your bishop is in Tanzania or some place in Africa.

This church used to be called the Repuplican Party at prayer, but they even lost that title to the Catholics or Baptists.

Apparently they are 'ruled' by a General Convention, here in the U.S. There they debate issues like Resolved: God is a lesbian. But not too bad; better than God is a grumpy old many who likes to burn people alive for a zillion zillion years for crossing Him.

But it's the inter-church fighting that's amazing. Like the old saying: I went to a prize fight and an Anglican argument broke out. Police had to be called!

So, why are they even this high on my list. Well, they have really great church buidings; their liturgy is not equaled by any other Christian church. Most of the communicants are nice and kind of "uptown." They wouldn't be caught having coffee for breakfast---always tea. The women imagine they have been reincarnated from a Jane Austen or Trollope novel.

Now if your daughter wants to marry into this group. Well, she WON'T get the immediate social boost she would have gotten 50 years ago. Still it may make her seem like she has British background. NOT Polish!!! So take it if you can.

BTW this 'Church' has the first blog parish. Maybe the wave of the future. I'll get to that at my next rest stop.

Very Nice---But...The Christians(Disciples)

I once knew a girl who was smart, attractive, kind, well-liked, active in 'good' causes; but still was really kind of a wall flower. Well, in a church that is like the Christian, disciples of Christ Church. It's all there, but this group lacks, well, dare I say it, Sex appeal.

This group is ecumenical to a fault; a good theology; active in the right causes. And their chruch building are quite nice. But somehow they just don't have it. At one time they did, but now they are seldom mentioned. Of course, we ask why. I can't really answer that. I just know that in our fair city, their downtown church use to average at least a thousand on any given Sunday. Now it's down to about 200. Maybe the name they go by---The Christian Church---is a little too obvious. Maybe if they changed their name to something like "The Latter Day Good Christians" they might come back But I think the real reason is they can't be identified by someone they hate. After all, the fundamentalists HATE those who don't believe every last blommin' word in The Book. The "liberals" think of the Bible as just the longest running best seller, and hate the fundamentalists; The Catholics hate democrats; the Anglicans hate each other---get my point?

So if your daughter wants to marry into this group---well, it really won't make any difference.

A Brief Rest Stop. The UU's.

A brief rest stop as we climb up the religion ladder. The Unitarians, as we call them here, but the Unitarian-Universalist as they prefer to be called by the "in" group. After all UU is better than just U---might be confused with the "Unity Church."

Is this a Christian church? Depends on how you mean that. No trinity, no saints, no relics---hell, they even have atheist members.. But, now get this. My wife, a life long Catholic, would go Unitarian if she had to switch. Which she won't.

I happen to live 6 blocks from the largest Unitarian Church in America in terms of membership. Here in the sticks, oddly, this group has great prestige. Why? Because some of the most prominent people in our little town have been Unitarians for the last century. When I was young they had a fine man as leader(or whatever you call the 'preacher' at a Unitarian church.) Robert Sonen was his name and he always had time to open his library and give his time to us young radicals. Later he was succeeded by a guy named Wolfe, who was okay, but was kind of in your face and had buck teeth. The old downtown Unitarian Church is now a funeral home. The new building is fine, but lacks the old charm.

So you admire the UU(I'll use the two U's). A lot of real nice people and still a mattress for falling Baptist (Menken). They don't hurt nobody(just for pj in case she stops by).

As Stuermann said: I love the Unitarians. The scripture reading is from the Picwick Papers, the offetory music is Ave Maria, and the semon is on the presiden't stimulus package.

Coming from the old Ethical Cultural Society in our part of the World, it is difficult to put then in my religion rankings. But just stopped for a tip of the hat and to satisfy my wife. Jack

Roman Catholics. THE BIG SLIDE

This is hard. It's my OWN religion. I thought about doing this in two parts--clergy and laity--but decided not after B16 announced that the laity were nothing. Yes, if the priest and God are EVERYTHING where does that leave the rest of us. WE ARE NOTHING. His quote: "Next to God, the priest is everything." So stop quibbling!!! So I'll spend a little time on the laity, but start with the clergy.

Roman Catholicism is unique in several ways:

One, the clergy makes up the single largest collections of gays in the world. Nothing really wrong with this, but they are all in a closet. It's so crowded in there, their dresses are beginning to show out the bottom of the closet door.

Two. As I wrote above, it is the only religion in which the laity have NO say.

Three. It is the only religion whose one and only cause today is to stamp out sex.

Four. It is the only religion in the world where the laity, well, most of them. don't pay any attention to the clergy's dictates.

This anti-sex church can be rather harsh. If you are a teen age boy and you think of your girlfriend and your 'private' expands even one hundreth of an inch---it's off to hell. And if a girl dreams of seeing her boyfriend without a shirt on---it's off to hell.

But let's not be too negative. The church buildings are the greatest; the music and art heritage is without peer. They used to have a real strong social ethic, but that's gone now to only one teaching---SEX IS BAD.

And there's something for everyone. If you dig pre-adolescent girls seeing ladies in blue, and springs of water emerging---well, we have it. If you like monks who can fly and be in two places at one time, check out Padre Pio. If you like weeping statues, the Virgin Mary on your patio door(she was on my office door---really!!!) then come join us.

It breaks my heart to think my religion, my family's religion has dropped in the ranking so far since my last survey a decade ago. But listen, I don't worry. The church has great schools , great football, some of the fanciest costumes you'll ever see and----WE ARE A BILLION STRONG. So take that!!

Now if your daughter is going to marry into this religion. you have just one worry. She may be an octomom(sp?) within 6 years and wind up with 16 offspring. But don't worry that's just in theory. Her husband, catholic as he may be, is NOT going to throw away his condoms