Paedophilic Priests

A

Anonymous

Guest
#1
Pedophilic Priests
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Where the Priestly error began.


Background

As a Rabbi (unordained by personal choice) I do not put a hyphen between the words Judaeo and Christian. The latter and the former of these two theologies are not connected. Christianity did not "evolve" out of Judaism rather it was imposed by force upon Judaism. Imagine that I bring a strange child into your home and say "This is your offspring." (reinforcing your acceptance by way of my rifle.)

Some 2,000 years ago Judaism's Rabbis rejected Jesus as having fulfilled Judaism's Messianic vision (King Messiah origined in Judaism and who and what he is and will do is found articulated in Jewish Law specifically in the works of Maimonides: Laws of Kings chapter 11:4)

http://communities.msn.com/MessiahWatchInternational/home.htm


Origin of Priesthood

Aaron, the brother of Moses, had 4 sons. He was Divinely selected to be the first High Priest of Judaism.

Innovations upon the OT (i.e. the Only Testament)

With very rare exceptions for special ceremonial occassions requiring high spiritual levels of purity the Jewish High priests and regular Temple priests were NOT required to observe celibacy. Certainly not life long celibacy. Priestly lifetime celibacy was a Catholic innovation which rebels against the first commandment found in the OT: To be fruitful and multiply.

Lifelong celibacy is therefore perceivable as a false and baseless piety taking its toll on the celibate Catholic priest and whomever he may abuse as a result of such self denial.

For 2,000 years learned Rabbis have rejected the claims regarding Jesus of Nazareth and subsequent developments in his name. Instead of being asked why they so decided or even given a fair hearing, the Rabbis of old were immediately demonized and shut up by the sword to promote the axioms of the Church which falsely claim to be rooted in the OT.

Perhaps the good Christians of the world will now begin to question some very basic tenents of what has been misportrayed to them as "Sacred" in their Christian educations. It's about high time.

Rabbi Moshe Yess email: [email protected]
 

SmirnoffMule

Ephemeral Spectre
Joined
Jan 22, 2002
Messages
448
Likes
9
Points
49
#4
I thought your post was funny, Lard. Made me laugh, anyway.



btw, is the UK and US spelling of "Paedophile" different? If so I apologise for the following comment: Maybe you should learn to spell the word before you start passing off any opinions about it as informed and valid.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
#6
(from Cambridge International Dictionary of English)

pedophile
noun [C]
especially American for paedophile

pedophilia
noun
ESPECIALLY AMERICAN
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
#7
As I say, blame Noah Webster. Poor guy was dyslexic (American as it is sometimes known) and couldn't cope with the fact that a lot of English words were of foreign (in this case Greek) origin, so he 'dumbed down.'
 

The late Pete Younger

Venerable and Missed
Joined
Jul 31, 2001
Messages
5,924
Likes
115
Points
129
#8
Rabbi M. Yess said:
(from Cambridge International Dictionary of English)

pedophile
noun [C]
especially American for paedophile

pedophilia
noun
ESPECIALLY AMERICAN


An interesting way of spelling the word, it brings to mind the word "pedant", a word you may wish to reflect upon.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
#9
Speaking of dyslexic....did you hear the one about the dyslexic, insommniac agnostic who stayed up all night wondering if there was a dog?

Rabbi Moshe Yess
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
#10
There's nothing an agnostic can't do if he really doesn't know whether he believes in it or not...

(c) Some old tosser out of Python.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
#11
pedant
noun [C]
DISAPPROVING
a person who is too interested in formal rules and small unimportant details


NOT ME!
 

SmirnoffMule

Ephemeral Spectre
Joined
Jan 22, 2002
Messages
448
Likes
9
Points
49
#12
Bloody Noah Webster :D

In that case I retract that comment, but not the part about Lard being funny.


I do think you deal with the paedophilia issue extremely simplicistly, however, even if you can spell it. Would that it were that simple. You clearly have no love or the Christian faith, which is your right. You make some interesting comments on the way Christianity has been enforced on people, and how Christian doctrine differs from the Jewish faith.
However, the paedophile thing is just kind of thrown in. It doesn't relate to the rest of your arguement at all, and you don't really back it up with facts. True, Catholic priests are celibate, Catholic priests have abused children. The two, simply because they have occured together, are not necessarily linked. You forget that the *majority* of Catholic priests don't abuse children. The majority of paedophiles are also not Catholic priests. I'm sure some Rabbis or people of Jewish faith who are held in a position of trust by parents and children have abused children also. Why did they do it?
Blaming the Christian faith for priests with paedophilic tendancies in such a blanket way does smack of prejudice. Paedophilia, and it's causes and effects are far too complex and deep-seated to have a single root cause.


Incidently, "He who stands for nothing will fall for anything."
Howabout:
"We stand for nothing because we won't be suckered into anything." ?


<edit and note to self - spelling "celibate" wrong at this juncture really doesn't make you look good :D >
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
#13
You raise some good issues. I admire your forthrightness.

In order from the start of your post if I may.

1) It IS simple and IS NOT not complicated. Deny a male his sexual need for woman and he will go homosexual: visit any prison for proof of that. As a Rabbi I hold that homosexuality like theft is a sin as the Bible states... and not an illness nor condition nor valid lifestyle. Yes Rabbis have committed pedophilic acts (very very rare indeed). The essential issue is the Christian misunderstanding of the Eve saga in Genesis. The original sin was not sexual. The sin was eating from a forbidden tree. Once again... The first Commandment in the OT is to be fruitful and multiply. Did God thereby command us to sin? Get the point?

2) While I love many good Christians I have no love for Christianity which: 1) perverted and erroneously redefined with malice and by force the Judaism it came out of; 2) brought more suffering to otherwise good Christians via religious terrorism than any other Faith; 3) presented a false and damaging "Peity" system to the ignorant. Because I dislike Christianity does not make me a biggot nor prejudiced. I see it for what it was and is: a self aggrandizing misportray of sacred matters already defined by God in the OT.

Priestly celibacy is the major cause of Priestly pedophilia. If God required no such celibacy upon Jewish Priests then why did the Church innovate that suffering upon its spokemen? Priests have a daily battle with their natural urges and no outlet for them. That is cruelty of human origin (not Divine) imposed upon them. Celibacy is false piety. The first Commandment in the OT is to be fruitful and multiply. Where did the Church get off rewriting God's Commandment?

As to your good question: Why did they (pedophiles) do it? Be it Priest, Rabbi or fishmonger... ANSWER: we all face free choice to obey God or not. They chose not to. I will not be silent to one who labels his/her sin(s) a lifestyle or predisposition or compulsive behavior or whatever.

Acum's Razor applies here: All matters considered the simplest answer is usually the right one.

BTW I am aware that this approach is about as popular as a snake bite but that's my job.

Rabbi Moshe Yess
 

ogopogo3

Justified & Ancient
Joined
Oct 25, 2001
Messages
1,375
Likes
14
Points
69
#14
If I recall correctly, in the early days of Catholicism, the church was required to pay pensions to wives and children of deceased priests. Celibacy became mandatory in order to save money, not as a sign of holiness, even though it eventually was perceived that way over time.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
#15
If that is true (can someone else confirm its truth?) then the situation is even sicker than the reason I gave above. Force a Priest to disobey the commandment to be fruitful and multiply in order to save a few bucks. Hmmmm.....ain't that just dandy!

Rabbi Moshe Yess
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
#16
I have been more or less celibate for most of my life.I do have sexual encounters(with women)from time to time,but they have usually been few and far between,and I really have never had any desire to marry.Ivalue my freedom too much to even have a steady girlfriend,even though I sometimes have the opportunity to have one.I'm too much a loner and I have no desire to hurt anyone.

Now I have never had any desire to be homosexual.I'm also not pedophilic,bestial,or a pervert.I believe that many of these priests probably entered the priesthood in an attempt to suppress this urge,and being typically weak humans,succumed to the urge.

I'm not Roman Catholic,nor am I sympathetic to these monsters in any way.I don't,however,think that men deprived of sex,either willingly or not,will usually revert to homosexuality or any other form of sexual expression unless they're inclined to.Iagree celibacy isn't typical for any creature,but I believe in many cases it's possible to live that way.
 

Glensheen'sGirl~

Devoted Cultist
Joined
Feb 6, 2002
Messages
170
Likes
3
Points
49
#17
Rabbi M. Yess said:
If that is true (can someone else confirm its truth?) then the situation is even sicker than the reason I gave above. Force a Priest to disobey the commandment to be fruitful and multiply in order to save a few bucks. Hmmmm.....ain't that just dandy!

Rabbi Moshe Yess
Gee Rabbi, the world certainly needs more people in it who are as open-minded as you. Nothing like trying to make people feel horrible for their religious choices, eh? I'm just glad that I know not everyone is as oppressive as you are coming off right now.

I'd welcome you to the boards as I try to do with new members, but...
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
#18
Actually Glensheen'sGirl...you have me pegged all wrong. I have no desire to make anyone feel bad about their religious choices.
We are all given the ability to think and analyze what we encounter. Too many people just shake their heads up and down in agreement with anything told to them by anyone posing as God's spokeperson be he Rabbi, Priest or Minister.

This is a religion and cults section. Catholicism presents itself as being based upon Judaism and being the fulfillment of Judaism's "lost" Messianic promise.

Being somewhat knowledgable about Judaism I have the right to protest what is erroneously presented in regards to Judaism.

If that level of dialogue is too hot for this board then just ask me to leave and I will. Otherwise may we stick with the issues and not kill the messenger for the critical message against what many erroneously assume is "Gospel."

Rabbi Moshe Yess
 

ogopogo3

Justified & Ancient
Joined
Oct 25, 2001
Messages
1,375
Likes
14
Points
69
#19
Ask you to leave? Nah. We won't do that. Just because you ask us to renounce our religions and accept an incredibly obscure nobody as your ritualistic cult's messiah? We wouldn't do that. That would be crazy. Nah, you're welcome here.

The Rabbi's an American. I'm taking bets now, people. Let's guess how this will all end.

Mass suicide, or ATF "intervention?"

I'm laying even money, so far.........but this may soon change.
 

harlequin2005

Abominable Snowman
Joined
Aug 3, 2001
Messages
824
Likes
5
Points
49
#20
As a comment from one of the board's avowed athiestic agnostic (to recap, I dont find the argument of a creator god, who would care what we do and with whom,convincing in any way, but I'm prepared to admit I don't know I'm right) To nail my colours to the mast, I regard most of the holy books as distorted histories and myth, with an overlay of social control of a group by an elite who cliam moral superiority based on rules they wrote...

This is getting wayyyy too personal. The Rabbi has proposed that, in his opinion the Christianity is a subversion. Looking at it historically, he is substantially correct, since the conversion of gentiles was a Pauline thing, and some judicious editing of the written versions of the gospels retro fitted it into the primary source.

There again, I don't much hold with the incorruptability of the Torah, as the Rabbi promulgates. There is much evidence of the earliest versions of the Pentateuch being polytheist. Again, a good bit of editing down the intervening 4000 years sorts the problem, save some odd references to 'gods and the daughters of men'.

So, please, lets debate the points not the feelings, or matters of grammar and spelling... :)

with that I return to the shadows...

8¬)
 

harlequin2005

Abominable Snowman
Joined
Aug 3, 2001
Messages
824
Likes
5
Points
49
#21
OT on Bigotry

Problem with any deeply held belief, when espoused, is that it can be almost indistinguishable from bigotry... If it got to 'All Christians should be burned as the heretics they are!' then that's bigotry :D Simply saying theyre wrong and should consider the alternative, after which they will see the error of their ways, is simply a belief. It could be as wrong as the counter opinion...

8¬)
 

Glensheen'sGirl~

Devoted Cultist
Joined
Feb 6, 2002
Messages
170
Likes
3
Points
49
#22
Rabbi, your tone comes off as though you are telling us what to think and how to think. I don't feel you asking me to do anything... your tone is indicative of telling me what to do.

I was raised Catholic, I've had enough of people telling me what to think and how to think.

Note: the following is my opinion, not to be misconstrued as me telling anyone else that I am necessarily right. This is simply my belief system.
It is my belief that there is but one God. I believe that the God I pray to is the same one everyone else who believes in God prays to. I think the rest of it is irrelevant. There will always be argument as to who is right and who is wrong. The one fact will remain, the one God. I personally think that if the "truth" were to be revealed, we'd find that the "one true religion" is actually a mixture of all the beliefs of all the current existing religions.

I take real offense at anyone trying to tell me what to do with my religious beliefs. But maybe that's just me. :rolleyes:
 

monster_magnet

Abominable Snowman
Joined
Aug 16, 2001
Messages
756
Likes
1
Points
49
#23
Literally speaking

To paraphrase a popular political drama:

I'm interested in selling my youngest daughter into slavery, as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7. She's a Georgetown sophomore, speaks fluent Italian, always cleared the table when it was her turn. What would a good price for her be?

My friend, insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2 clearly says he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself or is it okay to call the police?

Here's one that's really important, because we've got a lot of sports fans in this town. Touching the skin of a dead pig makes one unclean. Leviticus 11:7. If they promise to wear gloves, can the Washington Redskins still play football? Can Notre Dame? Can West Point?

Does the whole town really have to be together to stone my brother John for planting different crops side by side?

Can I burn my mother in a small family gathering for wearing garments made from two different threads? ;)

I think that if you wanted to you could find a reason to be apposed to most things if you take religious texts as literal.

One thing bothers me most of all and that is that the majority of religions don't take into account that humanity has progressed imessurably over the last 2000 years. What passed as 'laws to live by' thousands of years ago surely aren't as applicable now.

<< insert joke about my neighbours ass>>:p
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
#24
I've met lots of paedophiles in my professional capacity and the only thing they have in common is being caught: from what I've learned, I'd say there are huge numbers of them out there, furtively interfering with children right under our noses.

If a person wants sexual contact with children they'll go to extraordinary lengths to get it. They'll 'groom' particular kids for months or years to gain their trust. They'll court single mothers or take on jobs giving them access to children, including teaching, residential care or even the priesthood.

So the Catholic priesthood isn't any more full of peedies than any other 'caring' profession. It just seems a greater betrayal.
 

Bilderberger

Abominable Snowman
Joined
Aug 9, 2001
Messages
597
Likes
2
Points
49
#25
The argument that Priests become paedophiles because of their celibacy seems rather spurious to me. An incredibly simplistic view of the evolution of an individual's sexuality. Do we really have any proof that a higher percentage of Priests are peadophiles as opposed to Rabbis?

I quite agree with Urban Druid's point that the Catholic church is probably no more filled with paedophiles than any other caring profession - it is just more interesting to the media when a Priest abuses children as opposed to children being abused by a family member. I seem to recall that family members are responsible for something like 90% of child abuse. We should be more scared of our relatives than of a Priest.

As far as the sexuality of Priest/Vicars etc is concerned - without stereotyping too much - I have always been struck by the fact that all the pomp, ceremony and general theatrics of the Christian church attracts a high percentage of homosexuals. Massive generalisation there, but I may have a point. As for the import of that statement? I couldn't give a monkies about the sexuality of a Priest/Vicar/Rabbi etc. etc., they can do what they want with whom they like (as long as no abuse of anyone takes place).
 

beakboo1

Justified & Ancient
Joined
Sep 20, 2001
Messages
2,313
Likes
25
Points
69
#26
I don't understand your celibacy/paedophilia theory Rabbi. Surely if a man is forbidden sex with women, and can't cope with that, he'll break the rules by having sex with women?
Why on earth would he want to interfere with a child? Wouldn't that be forbidden too? There are just as many women potentially available to him as there are children.
And anyway, normal people aren't sexually interested in pre-pubescent children. If I can't get alcohol and I'm desparate for a drink, I don't drink milk instead. :cross eye
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
#27
To All,

Glensheengirl: I have told not one person here what to think or what to do. By the quality of your posts you demonstrate more than adequate reasoning skills. We pray to the same One God. What's the problem? I tell it like it is. The style is rudely blunt out of necessity... (misportrayals of the Sacred require blunt rebuttals)... but not dictatorial. Think as you wish...I am just giving some Jewish perspective input here.

Edward's portrayal of Judaism is typical of the uninitiated vis a vis Jewish Scriptures. He writes to mock. Not worthy of my time nor attention. Go discover your errors of Torah grasp on your own, Edward. Start with the Tamud which has 22 thick volumes of explanatory commentary from God on the meanings of what you misconstrue and misportray.

Beakboo and Bilderberge: Due to the Eve saga misportrayal.... Christianty has defined sex as sinful. Judaism does not hold that way. If male- female sex is forbidden and evil then touching little boys becomes a "kosher" alternative" and that is REALLY SICKO IN MY BOOK! Would God Command a sin? Note: Be fruitful and multiply.

Bilderberger: The greatest abuse to a Priest is telling him that to be celibate is Godly. No such directive is found in the Torah. The Priest becomes a sexual misfit suffering lifelong frustration. The kids he abuses suffer and what really burns me is the cloak of "Holiness" this is all wrapped up in.

Passover starts tonight. I will be offline till Saturday night after the Sabbath ends.

This is a lively group. I am at your disposal.

Would someone here tell me how Judaism determines its King Messiah?

Rabbi Moshe Yess
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
#28
Rabbi M. Yess said:
He who stands for nothing will fall for anything.
Why do you assume that just because I dont belive in a god I dont stand for anything? I have beliefs and morals and things I care deeply about, they just dont take the form of a supreme being that I cant prove exists.
 

NilesCalder

Justified & Ancient
Joined
Aug 20, 2001
Messages
1,820
Likes
4
Points
67
#30
Slytherin said:
Incidently, "He who stands for nothing will fall for anything."
Howabout:
"We stand for nothing because we won't be suckered into anything." ?
I'd rather prefer to note that standing for something doesn't require you to subscribe to any particular religious tenent.

I stand for a lot of things, and theres more than a few things I won't stand for. Paedophilia is something I do not tolerate, especially when committed by people who are entrusted to guide people both morally and ethically. Unless these people are utterly sociopathic or psycotic there is no excuse for their actions. If you know something is morally and ethically repugnant then you have no excuse for doing it anyway. That said I don't think that this illness is restricted to Xtian priests; I wouldn't be surprised if there were more than a few Rabbi's involved also.

Niles Calder
 
Top