WordWolf

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

*wild swing* Val Kilmer?

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

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

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

So, CES/STFI quietly pulled the plug on "personal prophecy." Not a word of explanation nor apology for their followers, laity, etc. Silence to us and everyone else on the subject. We know they still have people who read here, and did so all through the history of CES/STFI (and this thread.) No attempts to answer it from them, in any form, to anyone.

Here's one of the threads on Momentus, for those who couldn't find it.

Raf:

I know, if I had to choose one or the other to "follow", I'd choose MS over JAL. He has a lower track record of major boondoggles, and a LOT more humility. He also gets involved in people's lives and actually cares about them, and not just what they can do for him. A few minutes in a room with one and the other make it obvious they view people completely differently- you can feel the difference and see it for yourself.

I wasn't going to get into specifics about what that PP nonsense COST him personally. It's fair game to note that- if not FOR that cost- he would STILL be pushing that doctrine, no matter how much it hurt OTHER people- none of whom got an apology. We had threads here where we showed how the whole PP thing didn't match the Bible, and we had a thread where we outlined exactly how it worked (there's nothing supernatural about it.) JAL couldn't see any of that from the beginning, That doesn't bode well for his skill as a Christian or Biblical leader. (I'm not trying to lead something, and I saw it immediately and with little effort.) At the same time, he was still trying to get us to follow where he led. He neither led wisely nor saw that he was NOT leading wisely. (I can tell when I'm out of my depth or wrestling outside my weight-class.) A surfeit of pride- or a dearth of aptitude and skill- could explain that, but it certainly doesn't EXCUSE that. That doesn't even get into the Momentus debacle that he's STILL pushing- and has the brains to do silently. This speaks well for his brains- while speaking POORLY for his INTEGRITY. He learned from vpw to keep inconvenient truths from the public eye, but not to stop doing the wrong thing- just how to keep from getting caught. Furthermore, his "internet ministry" works well for him on paper. He has low overhead, can solicit funds, and doesn't have to actually get involved with real people other than by serving up empty platitudes- like in twi. The man has made a few cosmetic changes, but is mostly the same alleged "leader" he was in twi, with little actual GROWTH since then. I've gotten decades more wisdom, why hasn't he?

I remember Cindy Crawford did some Pepsi commercials, but I don't remember any wolf-whistles or catcalls, so it's probably not her. It is probably someone younger, who did a more recent commercial. I was going to guess "Hostel", but the hostel itself isn't an "antagonist." So, I've got nothing yet. (I can eliminate a lot of movies where the title doesn't reference an antagonist, but that will be more useful later, I think.)

Ok, I think Dolly Parton was in 9 to 5 Dabney Coleman War Games