# would be a hoot if not so sad (Priest "blesses" Hooters Restaurant)



## Scott (Jan 24, 2006)

*would be a hoot if not so sad (Priest \"blesses\" Hooters Restaurant)*

Roman priest blesses new Hooters restaurant

{Moderate}Edited for Title Appropriateness. Please see:

Basic Puritanboard Rules, Specifically Rule #2

Sincerely,
Your Friendly Supermoderator. 


[Edited on 1-28-2006 by joshua]


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot (Jan 24, 2006)

I would be all like  and  and  dude but when I read about the immorality of the Papacy in the middle ages stuff like this seems tame.


----------



## Peter (Jan 24, 2006)

I'm just surprised it wasn't the Cartwheel since I know the truth about the "celibate" RC clergy. BTW, I heard it was a grease fire in the bathroom that burnt it down.

[Edited on 1-25-2006 by Peter]


----------



## Ivan (Jan 25, 2006)

> _Originally posted by Scott_
> Roman priest blesses new Hooters restaurant




*WHAT?!

[Edited on 1-25-2006 by Ivan]*


----------



## Scott (Jan 25, 2006)

Andrew: I hear what you are saying. And you don't have to look to the middle ages either.


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot (Jan 25, 2006)

> _Originally posted by Scott_
> Andrew: I hear what you are saying. And you don't have to look to the middle ages either.



Too true.


----------



## Anton Bruckner (Jan 25, 2006)

Hooters  Catholic Priest


----------



## Puritanhead (Jan 25, 2006)

Look on the bright side... at least, it was a pretty established heterosexual establishment they were blessing...
:bigsmile:


----------



## Henry from Canada (Jan 25, 2006)

First of all, I have never eaten at "Hooters," but I checked out their website.

I do not want to defend the Catholic faith or the priest in question, however, this priest appears to be well-meaning. 

He asked God to " bless the building so it will be a safe haven, so that the families that enter will be blessed, so the employees will be blessed as they support their families." 

That seems to me to be a nice prayer. 

The rest of the article pointed out the humble and innovative ways he TRIED to reach out to the lost.

Whether he is right or wrong, saved or unsaved, I do not know. God knows.

It's just that personally I hate to criticize people from any denomination that seem to try to do loving things.

For many people, Catholic priests are intimidating people. Maybe what this priest did profoundly touched one of those vile Hooters waitresses. Maybe, someday when that Hooters waitress wants to reach out to God, she will go to a Catholic priest instead of a Reformed pastor. (I hope not.)

Little things like this can make a profound impression on people. 


Also, I have a stupid question:

Why is it people get so upset at Hooter's waitresses, when NFL cheerleaders apparently wear much less clothing?

How many people will refuse to eat food at Hooters, yet will think nothing of watching NFL football with its scantily-clad cheerleaders?

Please do not tell me that NFL football has other redeeming characteristics that make it wholesome.

I have not seen a football game in years, however, if my memory is correct:

- football is extremely violent and many football players leave the game with crippling injuries or drug addictions
- football promotes gambling
- football on TV promotes couch-potato behavior, instead wholesome physical activity
- football cheerleaders dress in a very immodest and sexual manner
- football unintentionally promotes drug use in order to allow players to bulk up and withstand pain
- football promotes idolatry
- NFL football players consistently violate the Sabbath 

I am not criticizing anyone that watches football, however, I am just really really confused.


----------



## matt01 (Jan 25, 2006)

> _Originally posted by Henry from Canada_
> - NFL football players consistently violate the Sabbath



Hi Henry,

It has been awhile since I "saw" you on board. How are you doing? I agree with you on this one. Of course, the Sabbath principle is a bit too old time for our modern society. One of the saddest things I have seen is a church cancelling their evening service in order to have a Super Bowl service, but I suppose that is a discussion for another time.

[Edited on 1-26-06 by matthew]


----------



## Henry from Canada (Jan 25, 2006)

Hi Matthew,

I hope things are well with you, and God blesses you in a very innovative way in the next 24 hours. (Strange prayer, I know.)

The Sabbath issue is really another issue and thread.

In the eyes of some people, I violate the Sabbath by exercising. 

I believe that it is permissible to do something "good" on Sunday. 

I am just not sure how "good" football is.

The bigger issue I grapple with is how people can criticize a priest who appears to be trying to do good at Hooters, yet watch a sport that is extremely violent, has scantily dressed cheerleaders, etc.

I am not criticizing football per se. When I was a kid, we played football during lunch. It helped us keep in shape, develop skills, etc. - and noone got hurt.

NFL football is another story.


Oh, I find this board to be absolutely fascinating.


----------



## SolaScriptura (Jan 25, 2006)

> _Originally posted by Puritanhead_
> Look on the bright side... at least, it was a pretty established heterosexual establishment they were blessing...
> :bigsmile:



EXACTLY! With all that crazy stuff going on in the Roman church, we should be happy that it is a HETEROSEXUAL establishment...


----------



## Henry from Canada (Jan 25, 2006)

To clarify my question:

My BIG issue is not with Hooters or NFL football. 

If you work hard all week and want to watch football on Sunday, what can I say?

What confuses me is how professing Christians harshly judge one another.

I see professing Christians criticizing Hooters, yet seemingly think nothing of watching NFL cheerleaders. This leaves me confused.


----------



## SolaScriptura (Jan 25, 2006)

> _Originally posted by Henry from Canada_
> I see professing Christians criticizing Hooters, yet seemingly think nothing of watching NFL cheerleaders. This leaves me confused.



Don't be confused... what you're observing is rank hypocrisy.

I really do like Hooters' hot wings. But I won't go there because of the girls... So I settle for lesser quality hot wings, but hey, that's the price you've gotta pay for having moral standards.


----------



## Henry from Canada (Jan 25, 2006)

Ben said:
"I really do like Hooters' hot wings. But I won't go there because of the girls... So I settle for lesser quality hot wings, but hey, that's the price you've gotta pay for having moral standards. "

I agree, and I can really respect that position.

I don't watch football for a whole bunch of reasons.

I just get exasperated by people judging one another, while turning a blind eye to their own issues.

This is a prayer I have had to pray many times:
Lord, it is easy to see the sins in others. Please help me see my own sins and repent of them.

This is extraordinarily difficult for me. I've had to repent of many things.

Oh, and I think those NFL cheerleaders are beautiful, too. It is very very hard to keep pure thoughts in today's world, but I try. 

And as brutal as football is, the way some of these teams can execute is truly awesome. I really wish they could make football safer. For example, I would prefer it if QBs were "downed" when any defensive player touched him in any way. This might spare them of bone-crushing tackles.


----------



## jfschultz (Jan 26, 2006)

> _Originally posted by matthew_
> 
> 
> > _Originally posted by Henry from Canada_
> ...



Ah yes it is about time for the annual SuperBowl on Sunday thread. :bigsmile:


----------



## Ivan (Jan 26, 2006)

> _Originally posted by jfschultz_
> 
> 
> > _Originally posted by matthew_
> ...



Nay, just give them the link to last year's thread.


----------



## Scott (Jan 26, 2006)

Henry: We would have the same issues if the priest went to bless a group of scantily-clad cheerleaders. The problem with the priest is that his action implies approval of an organization that is dedicated to the sexual exploitation of women. It demeans women and inflames men's lust. It is wrong.


----------



## Henry from Canada (Jan 26, 2006)

Scott said:
"We would have the same issues if the priest went to bless a group of scantily-clad cheerleaders. The problem with the priest is that his action implies approval of an organization that is dedicated to the sexual exploitation of women. It demeans women and inflames men's lust. It is wrong. "

Scott, do you have any issues with Reformed men spending Sunday afternoon passively sitting on a counch watching men engage in a very violent sport while scantily dressed women cheer them on and people from both sexes have millions of dollars in bets riding on the outcome?

I will not judge these men, but then again I am not about to condemn this priest. He appeared to mean well when he blessed the employees of Hooters and their families. God will judge him for better or worse.

Oh, and I have seen many posters on this board discuss and praise various football teams. Does that mean it is acceptable for Christians to praise modern-day NFL athletes who are paid to forcibly tackle people (for sport), yet it is wrong for other Christians to pray for Hooters' employees and their families?


----------



## Henry from Canada (Jan 26, 2006)

Ivan and another poster said:
"Ah yes it is about time for the annual SuperBowl on Sunday thread. 
....Nay, just give them the link to last year's thread."

This is not just about the Sabbath.

There are bigger issues.

For instance, why is it that if a priest blesses the employees and families of a food establishment with scantily dressed women, many Reformed people get really judgmental, yet on the very same board posters freely praise NFL football which promotes women who appear to be dressed with even less clothing.

I have never been to Hooters, however, I checked out its web site. These women are beautiful and the clothing is provactive, however back in the 1970s the Dallas Cowgirls wore less. 

I have only seen about 3 hours of football in the last 20 years, but I would assume the NFL cheerleaders still dress in a very immodest manner.

We seem to be judging the Catholic priest harshly, while not acknowledging that many Reformed men seem to deliberately expose themselves to scantily dressed women, needless violence, idolatry, etc. And by needlessly exposing themselves to this, they SUPPORT the purveyors and advertisers of this activity.

But hey, if you want to spend Sunday afternoon watching a violent sport, with crass advertising, scantily dressed women and Janet Jackson, what can I say? If that is how you wish to spend Sunday afternoon, then that is your decision. 

I generally spend Sunday stretching for at least one hour and exercising. But then again, this makes me a Sabbath breaker. By passively watching the Super Bowl I guess you will be upholding the Sabbath.

I will just defend a seemingly well-meaning priest who wants to pray for the employees and families of Hooters. I know how sinful this makes me appear in your eyes.

You work hard all week. Have a great time watching the Super Bowl. 

This board is fascinating.


----------



## Scott (Jan 26, 2006)

Henry: You are mischaracterizing what the priest is doing. He is not trying find "humble and innovative ways he to reach out to the lost." He is not going into Hooters to bring people out of it. The priest approves of Hooters. From the article:


> For the record, though, Rozycki [the priest] said he doesn't think Hooters deserves the bad rap it has gotten from some. He has eaten at a Dallas-area Hooters twice, he said, and enjoyed the experience.
> 
> People who go to the restaurant with lust in their hearts are sure to find what they are looking for, Rozycki said. But that would be true no matter where they went, he said, adding that the waitresses' uniforms are less revealing than what is on display at the beach or a public swimming pool.
> 
> "œI respect (the ministers') opinion, but I think it's the way and the attitude with which you approach it," Rozycki said. "œI look it as a very fun place. Ã‰ It was a place of laughter. You forget about the tensions and stress of daily life and get an opportunity to laugh with friends. Ã‰ And it's great food."


The priest is wrong, seriously wrong. He is approving of the exploitation of women and an environment designed and intended to inflame the illicit lusts of men. 

Do you know what "hooters" are? They are breasts. The restaurant is named after women's breasts. And they don't perform mamograms there. 

If you don't understand the problem with Hooters, I recommend that you consider and meditate on the full meaning of the 7th commandment. 

And I am not really into the NFL or other viewer sports (I do play racquetball occasionally).

Scott

[Edited on 1-26-2006 by Scott]


----------



## Henry from Canada (Jan 26, 2006)

Scott said:
"The priest is wrong, seriously wrong. He is approving of the exploitation of women and an environment designed and intended to inflame the illicit lusts of men. "

Scott, you could be very right on this. I have never been to Hooters.

The priest will have to account for his blessings of Hooter employees and their families - for better or worse.

We have to account for our own sins. Millions of men vegetate in front of the TV on Sunday passively watching violent and sexually exploitive professional sports. 

You are not one of them, Scott. I respect you for that.

However, I sense that this priest meant well and could have done something good by praying for these "vile" women. I will not condemn him. If you want to condemn him, that that is your choice.

Life is tough and the workweek is long. If anyone here wants to spend Sunday watching the Super Bowl, then I will not condemn you. But at the same time, I will not be watching, and I will not be criticizing that priest.

The measure you use to judge others will be.....


----------



## Anton Bruckner (Jan 26, 2006)

c'mon Henry. A Priest going in to Hooters to bless the establishment, of which the establishment will remain exactly the way management intended it?

The only time a Priest can legitimately bless Hooters is if He says, "Lord let them see the error of their ways and bring them to repentence, least they fall unmercifully into your wrath"


----------



## Scott (Jan 26, 2006)

Henry wrote: "I sense that this priest meant well and could have done something good by praying for these "vile" women."

Your statement would be more accurate if you had written: "I sense that this priest meant well and could have done something good by *approving of the degradation of* these *sexually exploited* women."

Do you know what hooters are (not the restaurant)?


----------



## Henry from Canada (Jan 26, 2006)

Scott, I may be the stupidest person that has ever lived.

When I read the entire article, I got the impression that this priest desperately wanted to reach out to the lost. His actions may be wrong, but I sensed that his heart was relatively good. (No one has an absolutely pure heart.)

Because of this impression, I am not going to condemn this man.

I am also going to refrain from condemning him because I am so aware of the lusts within my own heart. I do not want to judge harshly because these high standards may be used condemn me. 

I also try to avoid condemnation because every church I have ever attended has been critical of some people, but apparently blind to their own sin. For example, I remember a certain pastor who used to severely criticize smoking. This is fine in itself, but at the same time he was obese. And he did not appear to be obese because of a "glandular" problem; he was just slothful and gluttonous. 

We professing Christians have a reputation for being good a finding fault in others, but not ourselves. I am not talking about you Scott.

Scott, I suspect you and I will have to "agree to disagree." I think this priest is probably a good guy. You don't.

I could be very very wrong. It would not be the first time. I suspect the vast majority of people here agree with you, not me. But that's OK.


----------



## Henry from Canada (Jan 26, 2006)

Keon, I never have gone to Hooters.

Keon, how many professional or college football games have you watched in the past 10 years?

How many strangers have you sought out and prayed for in the past 10 years? More than this priest?

Were the Hooters employees more favourably desposed to God after the blessing, or before the blessing.

Is anyone here planning to watch the Super Bowl this year? Anyone? If so, how does it feel knowing that the NFL players often endure permanent injuries?

Hey, I'm not going to judge. I'm just not going to watch the game.


----------



## Henry from Canada (Jan 26, 2006)

Definition of professional sports:

20 men in desperate need of rest being watched by 20 million people in desperate need of exercise.

Do you know any Reformed people this applies to?


----------



## Scott (Jan 26, 2006)

Henry: do you know what hooters are?


----------



## Scott (Jan 26, 2006)

"Definition of professional sports: 20 men in desperate need of rest being watched by 20 million people in desperate need of exercise."


----------



## raderag (Jan 26, 2006)

Hey Scott, that would be a great half way meeting point for you and I.


----------



## Henry from Canada (Jan 26, 2006)

Scott asked:
"Henry, do you know what hooters are?"

I believe so. I never use the term, however. I think the term is offensive and juvenile.

I believe that the priest meant well, and could have made at least one Hooters employee more favourably inclined to reach out to God.

I will not condemn the priest. 

If you people wish to condemn the priest, then go ahead. 

We have an honest difference of opinion here.

Enjoy the game on Sunday. I hope noone gets hurt and noone endures lustful thoughts watching the cheerleaders.


----------



## Henry from Canada (Jan 26, 2006)

oops, I just remembered, Scott. You do not watch professional sports.
My apologies.


----------



## Scott (Jan 26, 2006)

Henry: What is your opinion of the priest's approval of "hooters?" 

What game on Sunday are you talking about? You seem preoccupied with an alleged criticism that does not seem to exist or be relevant to anyone on the thread.


----------



## raderag (Jan 26, 2006)

> _Originally posted by Henry from Canada_
> 
> Enjoy the game on Sunday. I hope noone gets hurt and noone endures lustful thoughts watching the cheerleaders.



Talk about a non-sequitor. I think Scott even mentioned that he tends not watch football. 

When did you stop beating your wife?


----------



## Henry from Canada (Jan 26, 2006)

You know, Scott, that is a good question.

The priest asked God to:
"bless the building so it will be a safe haven, so that the families that enter will be blessed, so the employees will be blessed as they support their families. 

The 63-year-old priest says he knows some people might think it's odd for a man of the cloth to bless a restaurant best known for waitresses who wear tight tops and short shorts. Rozycki also knows the move may draw the ire of other local religious leaders. 

About 60 local ministers signed a letter this fall in which they expressed their disapproval of the restaurant. They said they oppose Hooters because it exploits women and bases its marketing campaign on sexual innuendo. 

But to Rozycki, offering the blessing is just another way he can reach out and serve the community. He pointed to the biblical story of Jesus eating with a tax collector, even though men in that profession were considered among the worst of sinners. He says he doesn't see how attending the Hooters event is any different. 

For the record, though, Rozycki said he doesn't think Hooters deserves the bad rap it has gotten from some. He has eaten at a Dallas-area Hooters twice, he said, and enjoyed the experience. 

People who go to the restaurant with lust in their hearts are sure to find what they are looking for, Rozycki said. But that would be true no matter where they went, he said, adding that the waitresses' uniforms are less revealing than what is on display at the beach or a public swimming pool." 

I might add that there are many many restaurants, stores, banks, etc. which have similarly scantily-clad women. 

Is this right. I do not think so, but my focus is on trying to keep my own heart pure - not on focusing on the sins of others. (This is tough.)

In spite of this, the priest wants to avoid condemning Hooters employees.

The priest appears to want to bless these people. It appears he wants to reach to "the lost."

I think the priest could have reached out to them and still made some criticism of the dress. But perhaps the priest wanted so much to present a non-judgmental image of the church, he wanted to avoid any criticism. I have seen other well-meaning Christians do the same.

As I have stated before in this thread, the priest will be held accountable for his actions by God.

I will not condemn a man that seeks to reach out and bless "the lost." If you want to, go ahead.


----------



## raderag (Jan 26, 2006)

> _Originally posted by Henry from Canada_
> 
> In spite of this, the priest wants to avoid condemning Hooters employees.



And wants to frequent said eating establishment. I'm sure he just goes for the food.


----------



## Henry from Canada (Jan 26, 2006)

Brett said: 
"When did you stop beating your wife?"

Excuse me, I have beaten a woman or man.


----------



## raderag (Jan 26, 2006)

> _Originally posted by Henry from Canada_
> Brett said:
> "When did you stop beating your wife?"
> 
> Excuse me, I have beaten a woman or man.



Same logic you are using with Scott about football. That is my point. It's an old idiom.


----------



## Henry from Canada (Jan 26, 2006)

Brett said:
"And wants to frequent said eating establishment. I'm sure he just goes for the food. "

That is very possible. 

My favourite restaurant chain is Jimmy the Greek. I go just for the food.

Why would you think that anyone would go to Hooters just for the scantily-clad women.

When I was healthier, I used to go to the Y for exercise. The women there dressed with much less clothing, but I went there to exercise not look.

Even when I spoke to these women often times the focus was not on their lack of clothing, but on proper exercise technique. One of the young pretty customers there used to constructively criticize my technique.

Brett, why else would anyone go to Hooters? There are thousands of restaurants with scantily-clad women.

Maybe this priest just desperately wants to reach out to the lost. Maybe is technique is flawed, but his motivation is good. 

You people want to condemn him, but not me.


----------



## raderag (Jan 26, 2006)

> _Originally posted by Henry from Canada_
> Brett said:
> "And wants to frequent said eating establishment. I'm sure he just goes for the food. "
> 
> ...



Because I am a man.



> When I was healthier, I used to go to the Y for exercise. The women there dressed with much less clothing, but I went there to exercise not look.
> 
> Even when I spoke to these women often times the focus was not on their lack of clothing, but on proper exercise technique. One of the young pretty customers there used to constructively criticize my technique.
> 
> ...



So, maybe Christians can go to strip clubs for the cheap steak?


----------



## Henry from Canada (Jan 26, 2006)

Brett asked:
"Same logic you are using with Scott about football. That is my point. It's an old idiom."

My mistake Brett. I forgot that Scott did not watch football. My apologies.

Brett, do you realize that by asking me when I stopped beating my wife, you are in fact suggesting that I have committed a crime?


----------



## Henry from Canada (Jan 26, 2006)

Brett asked:
"So, maybe Christians can go to strip clubs for the cheap steak? "

I do not know how to answer that question. Sorry. 

Is Hooters, in fact, a strip club?


----------



## Henry from Canada (Jan 26, 2006)

You know, Brett asked me when I stopped "beating" my wife.

I think I better leave this thread.

Wife-beating is a very very serious crime in Canada. 

It is very very rare that I am accused of an action so vile.


----------



## raderag (Jan 26, 2006)

> _Originally posted by Henry from Canada_
> Brett asked:
> "Same logic you are using with Scott about football. That is my point. It's an old idiom."
> 
> ...



Henry, that statement is a common idiom to suggest the absurdity of your logic. It isn't a real accusation.


----------



## raderag (Jan 26, 2006)

> _Originally posted by Henry from Canada_
> You know, Brett asked me when I stopped "beating" my wife.
> 
> I think I better leave this thread.
> ...



Henry, you weren't. It is just a saying.


----------



## Scott (Jan 26, 2006)

Henry: Do you know what "hooters" are? They are breasts. Why do you think the retaurant used that name? It is an organization dedicated to sexually exploiting women and inflaming the lusts of men. Don't you think degrading women is wrong?

Your argument about Jesus and the tax collectors and sinners does not go very far. Jesus did not say "I think tax collectors, prostitutes, and sinners have got a bad rap. Everybody needs to relax and they all offer good services." The priest did say that the restaurant named after breasts is a good place. Put aside the blessing and look at his statements of approval about this restaurant named after women's breasts.


----------



## Henry from Canada (Jan 26, 2006)

Brett said:
"Henry, that statement is a common idiom to suggest the absurdity of your logic. It isn't a real accusation. "

I have never heard this idiom used before in this context.

Where I come from this idiom is called slander.

In any event, I fear we are flogging a dead horse.

I respect the opinion of you people. You may be absolutely right. 

I respect the Bible knowledge of the people on this board. 

And, I acknowledge that this priest in the eyes of many may be supporting a business that incites lust.

I just can not condemn a person who appears to be well-meaning and appears to be trying to bless the employees of Hooters and their families.

I suspect dozens of people on this board will be watching the Super Bowl. You work hard all week; enjoy the game!


----------



## raderag (Jan 26, 2006)

> _Originally posted by Henry from Canada_
> Brett said:
> "Henry, that statement is a common idiom to suggest the absurdity of your logic. It isn't a real accusation. "
> 
> ...



I would never flog a dead horse. Perhaps that is an idiom?


----------



## raderag (Jan 26, 2006)

> _Originally posted by Henry from Canada_
> 
> 
> 
> I suspect dozens of people on this board will be watching the Super Bowl. You work hard all week; enjoy the game!



Once can watch football without watching the cheerleaders.


----------



## Henry from Canada (Jan 26, 2006)

Scott said Hooters:
"It is an organization dedicated to sexually exploiting women and inflaming the lusts of men. Don't you think degrading women is wrong?"

Of course I think degrading men women is wrong. I have never gone to Hooters.

My dad once told me a story:

A pastor in Holland once went to the seady part of town and played cards and gambled with a few "low lifes." After he was done, the pastor said something like "OK guys, I've visited you, how would you like to visit my church on Sunday?"

Was this (reformed) pastor doing the right thing?

After reading the entire article, I can not help thinking that this priest is hungry to reach the lost. I can sympathize with him, and I hope his visit to Hooters causes at least one Hooters employee to maybe reach out to God.


----------



## Henry from Canada (Jan 26, 2006)

Brett said:
"I would never flog a dead horse. Perhaps that is an idiom? "

Yes, that is an idiom that I am familiar with. 

I remember the first time I heard that idiom in 1983. An Army captain said something about flogging a dead horse. I thought, "what is flogging?"

Then after I found out what flogging was, I wondered how efficient
flogging a dead horse would be.

Oh well.


----------



## Scott (Jan 26, 2006)

> My dad once told me a story:
> A pastor in Holland once went to the seady part of town and played cards and gambled with a few "low lifes." After he was done, the pastor said something like "OK guys, I've visited you, how would you like to visit my church on Sunday?"



This analogy is not good. By his words the priest in the article expressly approves of the restaurant named after breasts. He also does not say anything about trying to get people to come to church or anything else of the sort. As far as I can tell, he thinks that they are fine where they are. From his perspective if people go to the restaurant named after women's breasts in order to actually ogle women's breasts, well the lust is just there in their hearts in the first place. The priest places a moral equivalence between ordinary restaurants and the restaurant named after women's breasts. You seem to likewise judge a moral equivalence b/t ordinary organizations (like banks) and restaurants named after women's breasts. This is bad judgment. 

The priests does not say anything is wrong with the restaurant named after women's breasts. As for the story you offered, a more analogous story would run:


> A pastor in Holland once went to the seady part of town and visited a house of prostitution. The pastor said a blessing over the house. He said that houses of prostitution get a bad rap. They are nice places you can go and have a good time.



Scott


----------



## Henry from Canada (Jan 26, 2006)

In reply to Brett and Scott:

If you want to condemn the priest, go right ahead. I can see the logic for your condemnation. In the eyes of many, a restaurant that names itself after an intimate female body part does not seem too wholesome. And no doubt, some men will go there just to see attractive females.

I, however, will not condemn this priest. I have seen other well-meaning people overlook sin in order to reach out to the lost. I suspect this man's intentions are loving. I will not condemn.

I realize that I am in the minority, but so often in cases like this, I am hestiate to criticize people that seek to do good. 

I hope that the priest's blessing of the employees of that establishment causes at least one person to reach out to God.

I can respect your condemnation of that priest and myself.


----------



## raderag (Jan 26, 2006)

> _Originally posted by Henry from Canada_
> In reply to Brett and Scott:
> 
> If you want to condemn the priest, go right ahead. I can see the logic for your condemnation. In the eyes of many, a restaurant that names itself after an intimate female body part does not seem too wholesome. And no doubt, some men will go there just to see attractive females.
> ...



He had my respect up to the point he said he frequented the place.


----------



## Henry from Canada (Jan 26, 2006)

Scott:
Scott said:

"a more analogous story would run:
....A pastor in Holland once went to the seady part of town and visited a house of prostitution. The pastor said a blessing over the house. He said that houses of prostitution get a bad rap. They are nice places you can go and have a good "

Scott, are you accusing Hooters of committing the crime of prostitution?

This is very upsetting. I thought Hooters was infamous for waitresses with short shorts and revealing tee shirts. I thought that Hooters operated totally within the law.

Have you alerted the authorities of this?


----------



## Scott (Jan 26, 2006)

Henry: Are you accusing Hooters of gambling?


----------



## Henry from Canada (Jan 26, 2006)

Read the entire article.

If you want to condemn this priest, then do so.

I, however, will reserve judgment and hope that his unusual activities bear some fruit.


----------



## Scott (Jan 26, 2006)

"I, however, will not condemn this priest. I have seen other well-meaning people overlook sin in order to reach out to the lost."

The article says nothing and does in any way suggest that he is trying to reach the lost or that the priest in any way thinks anything is wrong with this restaurant named after women's breasts. From everything the priest said, he is trying to join them.


----------



## Scott (Jan 26, 2006)

"Read the entire article." 

I have read it twice. You are mistaken if you think he is trying to reach the lost or if you believe he even thinks they are doing anything wrong.

[Edited on 1-26-2006 by Scott]


----------



## Henry from Canada (Jan 26, 2006)

Scott asked:
"Henry: Are you accusing Hooters of gambling? 

I never would accuse Hooters of gambling. I apologize if any of my posts implied that anyone at Hooters gambled. 

What I did mean to say, however, is that many - but not all- football fans gamble. I think there is ample evidence to support this claim.


----------



## Henry from Canada (Jan 26, 2006)

In reply to Ryan:

Ryan, I am sincerely sorry that I indirectly taught you a bad word. The thought that your pure mind has been slightly disturbed is very disturbing. 

However, I find threads like this extremely enlightening. They allow me to see the hearts of people. 

They have changed the way I have viewed my Reformed forefathers. My father passed away in 1999. I wish he were alive today so that we could discuss these topics.

I have learned a lot about human nature on this board.


----------



## Henry from Canada (Jan 26, 2006)

Ryan said:
"Yeah, we got some jabs in at the priest, but in all seriousness, there is plenty of liberality and stupidity in the evangelical and Protestant world as well."

Well put, Ryan. That is yet another reason I hestitate to condemn this priest.

The measure you to judge will......


----------



## Scott (Jan 26, 2006)

"I never would accuse Hooters of gambling. I apologize if any of my posts implied that anyone at Hooters gambled."

My point was that your story about gambling did not imply Hooters is a gambling establishment any more than my story about the pastor who visisted a house of prostitution implies that Hooters is involved in prostitution.


----------



## Scott (Jan 26, 2006)

Ryan: The convseration has gone from talking about the restaurant to Henry's general accusations about the hypocrisy of PB members, the nature of the exploitation of women, what kind of conduct implies approval, etc.


----------



## Henry from Canada (Jan 26, 2006)

Scott, we agree on two things.

We both do not eat at Hooters.

We both do not spend Sunday afternoons watching men play a violent sport with scantily-clad cheerleaders cheering them on.

Were do we disagree?
I will not condemn the priest for twice visiting Hooters and praying for its employees.

Actually, I won't condemn anyone for watching the Super Bowl either.

This board is absolutely fascinating. Have a great day!


----------



## Henry from Canada (Jan 26, 2006)

Scott said:
"My point was that your story about gambling did not imply Hooters is a gambling establishment any more than my story about the pastor who visisted a house of prostitution implies that Hooters is involved in prostitution. "

That is a relief. I knew exceedingly little about Hooters till yesterday. I would hate to be defending an establishment that supported illegal activities. 

The pastor in my story did in fact literally play cards and gamble.


----------



## Henry from Canada (Jan 26, 2006)

You people have taught me a lot.

How I view my Dutch Reformed forefathers will never be the same.


----------



## Peter (Jan 26, 2006)

> _Originally posted by Henry from Canada_
> You people have taught me a lot.
> 
> How I view my Dutch Reformed forefathers will never be the same.



Henry, what exactly have you been taught?


----------



## Henry from Canada (Jan 26, 2006)

In reply to Peter:

At a later date, I may elaborate on your question. I am dealing with some energy constraints right now. I still have yet to exercise today. 

If the people on this board wish to condemn this priest, then go ahead.

I will not condemn this man. I suspect his motivation was love. I suspect someone like this will sometimes make certain sinners more likely to behave in a Godly fashion. I suspect people like this priest make a lot of mistakes, because the people that try the most usually make the most errors.

I could be dead wrong on this. If so, I am sorry.

Peter, you are one poster on this board that really impresses me. I suspect that you are a real gentleman. It's too bad we disagree on certain issues. 

Oh well, have a wonderful day.


----------



## Henry from Canada (Jan 26, 2006)

I noticed that many of you "modern day" Puritans like worldly entertainments such as the Beatles, the Rolling Stones, Seinfeld, etc., even though they frequently glorify sinful activities such fornication.

Question:
Did the 17th century puritans also willingly consume such material? Did they read novels that frequently praised fornication?
How would they feel about the Dallas Cowgirls - and their manner of dress?

Or, did their pasttimes and interests resemble those of the sinners?


----------



## Henry from Canada (Jan 26, 2006)

Oh Ryan, you impress me too. I suspect you and I both understand how difficult it is to deal with the "lusts of this world." 

I just feel so guilty for teaching you a naughty word.


----------



## Henry from Canada (Jan 26, 2006)

Ryan said:
"BTW What happened to "the measure you to judge will......" I have trouble understanding where you are coming from, when you get on people for being "gun-toting hicks" and for objecting to the blessing of this restaurant establishment, and than you play accuser regarding people's worldliness. I have yet to see anyone post NFL cheer =leader pictures on the forum. 

1. I never called anyone here a gun-toting hick. Who did I call a "gun-toting heck"?

I said that when you post a handgun and iPod on a Christian board and ask which is the better investment on Christmas Eve, some people may have their worst perceptions of Christians confirmed. Some people might think that this board is populated by "gun-toting Christian hicks." On a public board, perceptions count because we are Ambassadors of Christ.

If the Pope posted a web page on the Vatican web site that asked which is a better investment a gun or an iPod (pictures included), some people may become very disturbed. I suspect some people on this board would get very upset.

2. I am not accusing anybody of anything. And I am not telling anyone what to do. If you want to listen to "Can't get no satifaction" by the Stones, go ahead. If you want to watch Joe Theissman (sp?) get his leg broken, go ahead. If you want to watch Seinfeld, go ahead.

BUT if you want to criticize a priest for blessing the employees of Hooters, then I feel strangely compelled to ask a few questions.

If you want to criticize the way Hooters waitresses dress, then I get confused because NFL cheerleaders dress with even less clothing. There appear to be many NFL fans here. What gives?

3. "The measure you use to judge will be used to judge you."

I have to remind myself of the same thing sometimes. I used to watch Seinfeld in years gone by. I think the show is brilliant, yet the subject matter is distressing. I was so distressed at TV, I went 3 years without it.
Even now, I only watch about 1 hour per week.

I am not criticizing anyone for watching Seinfeld. I am questioning people who criticize sinful TV programs, yet watch these very same programs.
If you want to watch Seinfeld, fine. But again, I get confused. Many of you modern-day Puritans like this entertainment. Did the 17th century Puritans approve of novels glorifying fornication?

There is absolutely no doubt that I hold many minority views here.

That is OK. But when I saw this priest being criticized, I became confused and concerned. 

If I am wrong, please forgive me.

If you want to condemn this priest, go ahead.

My prayer is:
Lord, it is easy to see the sins in others. Please help me see and repent of my own sins.


----------



## Henry from Canada (Jan 26, 2006)

In the eyes of myself and "many in the world" you behavior represents the Puritans.

If you call this the Puritanboard, people like me often think that you are modern-day Puritans.


----------



## matt01 (Jan 27, 2006)

> _Originally posted by Henry from Canada_
> I just get exasperated by people judging one another, while turning a blind eye to their own issues.



I hear you, Henry. It is interesting that some sins are easier to condemn. Speeding is acceptable, because "we are just going with the flow of traffic." Having a co-worker punch out our time cared is ok because "that tight wad of a boss doesn't pay what he should." But when are son or daughter announces that they are {fill in the blank}, we hit the roof and scream about sin. If we hate sin, shouldn't we hate all sin? If we condemn a certain type, shouldn't we condemn ourselves for being {fill in the blank}?


----------



## Henry from Canada (Jan 28, 2006)

Thanks Matthew, your response makes me feel less alone on this board.



Life is tough. I suspect those waitresses at Hooters do not make a lot of money. And I fear that some of them are somewhat uncomfortable dressing the way they do.

On the other hand, many NFL cheerleaders and many girls in the malls wear much less clothing. 

I hope the priest's blessing impacted at least one of these women in a positive way.



A few years ago, I worked with a young woman who was very beautiful, but had a past full of rebellion and drugs. 

On the surface, she was a confident, beautiful, articulate babe. Some of the women in the office were angry that she showed a little cleavage.

Now when I look back, I suspect she felt very guilty over her rebellion in her past. I suspect she also felt guilty over the fact that she did not seem to fully make use of her potential, or her "talents."

Normally, we guys tend to think beautiful girls have it made. After all, someone that looks like a young Terri Hatcher (like her) must have all sorts of options.

But others told me that her boyfriend was a heel.

Anyway, in hindsight, I remember how hurt she looked when she had to endure even slight rejection from ugly, dirty men. She was somewhat intimidating because she had an explosive temper, but in hindsight, I remember once we were talking and she said she could no longer say anything more because she might burst into tears.

Anyway, I suspect many of these beautiful women at Hooters in those "vile" costumes are just like this woman.

Some of them are probably single parents. Some of them are constantly bombarded by amorous men looking for only one thing - and that's not their interpretation of Romans 9. (Well, Ryan might be interested in Romans 9.)

I think it would be extremely cool if this "vile" priest actually made an impact on their life.

I think it would be great if this priest's blessing encouraged one of these women to maybe rethink this concept of God and maybe reach out to a Christian or purchase a Bible.

On the other hand, maybe you guys are right. Maybe this priest should have petitioned to have Hooters banned. Maybe the priest should have lectured these women on proper dress, and then lectured those even more scantily-clad cheerleaders on the same subject.

Perhaps a good lecture from a priest would have convicted these sinners.

I highly doubt the 17th Puritans would have condoned the way young women generally dress in today's society.

Anyway, this is where we disagree:

After reading this article, I suspected that this priest's motive was to reach out to the lost and overcome any feelings of rejection these women had over the petition to ban Hooters.

None of the above posts have changed my perception, unfortunately.

We will have to agree to disagree on this one.

I could well be wrong.

My prayer to God:
Lord, please show me how to properly reach out to non-Christians, so that I can properly react totheir prejudices, fears, hurst, etc. 
(And also so I do not behave stupidly and give Christians a bad name.)


----------



## Henry from Canada (Jan 28, 2006)

I am sorry if I offended you in any way, Ryan.

The woman in question was bombarded by many men over non-religious stuff, not wholesome stuff like how to properly interpret Romans 9.

I figured a decent man such as you, who did not even know what hooters were, would be more interested in loftier topics such as Romans 9.

Actually, I've debated Romans 9 with a woman who did not know who Britney Spears was.


----------

