[smoyer]

Well Reverend ... I think your claim has merit but I'd be interested in knowing what denomination ordained you with language like that. I'd recommend you avoid curse-words like that in your court filing and in the event you talk with officials involved in your case.

[grecy]

> what denomination ordained you with language like that.

Huh?

How about I grew up on the other side of the world, in a completely different culture, where we don't care for words like 'denomination' and 'ordained'.

Welcome to the internet, which as you don't seem to understand, is global.

[smoyer]

I never assumed you were from the US, though I'll admit I'm not as well versed in the operation of denominations, sects, religions, cults as I could be. Since your post was in English, I did assume it was a language you spoke and that at a minimum you'd have access to a dictionary that contained the words 'denomination' and 'ordained'.

So while I was curious before, now I just think you're a jerk, and I'm rereading your post in a different light (the jerk that's always got a chip on his shoulder light). Have a blessed day, night, evening, morning or whatever it is where ever you are.

* Also note that I didn't comment on your use of the swear words ... it's pretty common and I can filter it out and/or understand the exclamatory nature of the use.

[grecy]

Note: I'm not the OP of the article.

[anu_gupta]

Um, you do realise that Dan Catt isn't really a priest or a minister, don't you?

[smoyer]

Is this him?

http://www.findagrave.com/cgi-bin/fg.cgi?page=gr&GRid=739426...

[wonderzombie]

Wait, how do you know any denomination did ordain him with that language? Or, wait, would you have preferred German?

[lightyrs]

Where is it written that a Reverend shall not use such language?

[smoyer]

This one took me a while ;)

1) Koran - [4:148] GOD does not like the utterance of bad language, unless one is treated with gross injustice. GOD is Hearer, Knower.

2) Talmud - [Ketubot 8b] Even a heavenly decree for seventy years of good can be reversed if one perverts his mouth with improper speech.

3) Bible - [Ephesians 5:4] Neither should there be vulgar speech, foolish talk, or coarse jesting – all of which are out of character – but rather thanksgiving. 5:5 For you can be confident of this one thing: 8 that no person who is immoral, impure, or greedy (such a person is an idolater) has any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and God.

4) A gentleman has no skill in trifles, but has strength for big task: the vulgar are skilled in trifles, but have no strength for big tasks. - Confucius, Analects, c.400 b.c.

5) Buddism - "Right Speech" : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_speech#Right_speech

Note that I'm not sure where to look for other religions of the world.

[vacri]

Religious arguments frequently don't work like that. Where is it written, for example, that Catholics must not use condoms?

[bcoates]

http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/paul_vi/encyclicals/docume...

Section 14, "Unlawful Birth Control Methods"

[anigbrowl]

If you're religious, the prohibition is based on Genesis 38, in which a fellow called Onan avoided his familial obligations towards a woman, having sex for pleasure but pulling out to avoid conception. This irritates God, who promptly strikes him dead. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Onan has an in-depth explanation from multiple doctrinal perspectives.

[buo]

Here, actually: http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/justpe...

Search the document for "contraception".

[lightyrs]

That's pretty much my point.

[vacri]

I think the GP has a fair question - the stereotype of people who label themselves 'Reverend' includes a considered reluctance to use profanity. It's not saying that reverends can't do this if they're 'real', but it is far enough out of the stereotype to ask just what kind of denomination is the author a reverend for?

Whether or not it's "written" somewhere doesn't mean that there isn't a stereotype as to how 'holy' men (it's always men...) should behave. Witness the confusion when Westerners got into Indian religions in a big way, then couldn't quite square the way some gurus shagged themselves silly - 'holy' men were 'supposed' to be celibate, if not in actuality, then at least in behaviour. It isn't the done thing to have your Anglican priest bragging about his last shagging session with his wife, for example.

Or is the author using 'reverend' as a joke appellation, without seriously being one?

[farresito]

It's just not polite. It's a nice post that could have been better had he used a nicer language.

[lightyrs]

Okay, that's a different view — one that I am more prone to agree with, although I feel the language did lend a visceral tone to the piece, which seems appropriate given the subject matter.