Catholics & Catholicism

Question:

You know… talking to one’s self is often thought to be a sign of mental instability… BB, Rob Curriden

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – i disagree u must learn to awaken the sleep inside u as well as the world outside space cure is not pain pain is the symptom,life awake is the cure blessed be to you,in peace,trust,truth and love may the lord and lady shower you with abundance

Response:

Too many drugs Ronn – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Most people, even though they don’t know it, are asleep. They’re born asleep, they live asleep, they marry in their sleep, they breed children in their sleep, they die in their sleep without ever waking up. They never understand the loveliness and the beauty of this thing that we call human existence. You know ~ all mystics ~ Catholic, Christian, non-Christian, no matter what their theology, no matter what their religion ~ are unanimous on one thing: that all is well, all is well. Thought everything is a mess, all is well. Strange paradox, to be sure. But, tragically, most people never get to see that all is well because they are asleep. They are having a nightmare. That’s all. Even the best psychologist will tell you that…people don’t really want to be cured. What they want is relief; a cure is painful. Waking up is unpleasant, you know. You are nice and comfortable in bed. It is irritating to be woken up. That’s the reason the wise guru will not attempt to wake people up. I hope I’m going to be wise here and make no attempt whatsoever to wake you up if you are asleep. It is really none of my business, even though I say to you at times, "Wake up!" My business is to do my thing, to dance my dance. If you profit from it fine; if you don’t, too bad! As the Arabs say, "The nature of rain is the same, but it makes thorns grow in the marshes and flowers in the gardens."

Response:

Too many drugs Ronn

Or maybe, not enough drugs. Lori Mc

Response:

who said i was talkig to myself here u go assuming blessed be to you,in peace,trust,truth and love may the lord and lady shower you with abundance

Response:

I know who you are!   You’re HorseGallop, right????    I remember you here from the past! – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – who said i was talkig to myself here u go assuming blessed be to you,in peace,trust,truth and love may the lord and lady shower you with abundance

Response:

 i disagree u must learn to awaken the sleep inside u as well as the world outside space cure is not pain pain is the symptom,life awake is the cure blessed be to you,in peace,trust,truth and love may the lord and lady shower you with abundance

Response:

Most people, even though they don’t know it, are asleep. They’re born asleep, they live asleep, they marry in their sleep, they breed children in their sleep, they die in their sleep without ever waking up. They never understand the loveliness and the beauty of this thing that we call human existence. You know ~ all mystics ~ Catholic, Christian, non-Christian, no matter what their theology, no matter what their religion ~ are unanimous on one thing: that all is well, all is well. Thought everything is a mess, all is well. Strange paradox, to be sure. But, tragically, most people never get to see that all is well because they are asleep. They are having a nightmare. That’s all. Even the best psychologist will tell you that…people don’t really want to be cured. What they want is relief; a cure is painful. Waking up is unpleasant, you know. You are nice and comfortable in bed. It is irritating to be woken up. That’s the reason the wise guru will not attempt to wake people up. I hope I’m going to be wise here and make no attempt whatsoever to wake you up if you are asleep. It is really none of my business, even though I say to you at times, "Wake up!" My business is to do my thing, to dance my dance. If you profit from it fine; if you don’t, too bad! As the Arabs say, "The nature of rain is the same, but it makes thorns grow in the marshes and flowers in the gardens."

Response:

Question:

What is a Cult? Before we can begin, it is necessary to have a working definition of a cult. The American Heritage Dictionary lists as the primary definition of a cult as

The American Heritage Dictionary is the worse dictionary one can use when describing contemporary word usage.  The dictionary was collected and edited, by all indications, by hate filled fundamentalist Christians — if you look at some of the mistakes in the dictionary.  For instance:     a

Question:

Is it possible that Pius XII fell into heresy? Heresy can be entirely internal, in the heart and mind, unexpressed in word or deed. There are two possibilities. Either the Pope is able to commit heresy, or he is not. 1. If the Pope could ever possibly fall into heresy, we can never be certain which Popes fell into heresy, because heresy can be entirely internal. If so, then Pius XII could have fallen into heresy. 2. If it is impossible for any Pope to fall into heresy, because the Pope is the seat of the Sacred Magisterium, then no Pope can be accused of any kind or degree of heresy. If so, then Pius XII could not have fallen into heresy. Ron Conte

Response:

Is it possible that Pius XII fell into heresy?

Yes.  Possible, but not likely, based on what he "said" and "wrote", in comparison to what the Church Constantly and Consistently Teaches. Heresy can be entirely internal, in the heart and mind, unexpressed in word or deed.

Ok.  It can also be EXPRESSED "in word or deed", and often IS, though apparantly not by a valid pope.  "Apparantly", meaning I can’t find anything regarding a pope (Pius XXII and before) contradicting Dogma, which admittedly doesn’t mean much to anyone else. There are two possibilities. Either the Pope is able to commit heresy, or he is not.

Ok.  However, "able" is a term which seems more applicable to Mary’s "ability" to sin (any sin), vs. a pope’s "ability" to sin (commit heresy). Just a thought. 1. If the Pope could ever possibly fall into heresy, we can never be certain which Popes fell into heresy, because heresy can be entirely internal. If so, then Pius XII could have fallen into heresy.

I disagree.  Heresy "can be" entirely internal.  No argument here.  And that heresy (internal) can never be known, by the faithful, UNLESS there is private Revelation involved (and THAT is a discussion for an ENTIRELY different thread), and no other person is required to believe that "private Revelation", anyway.  Conversely, heresy can be external (or a combination of both).  And external heresy is certainly something the faithful CAN determine, one would think.  Though, "interpretation" of what is said/written plays a part, I will readily admit.  So, "we can never be certain which popes fell into heresy" is, to some degree, true.  What Catholics DO, is BELIEVE that no valid pope is EVER going to contradict the Constant and Consistant Teaching of the Church, in that pope’s Teaching on Faith and Morals;  that no valid pope is EVER going to contradict either Holy Scripture or Holy Tradition. 2. If it is impossible for any Pope to fall into heresy, because the Pope is the seat of the Sacred Magisterium, then no Pope can be accused of any kind or degree of heresy. If so, then Pius XII could not have fallen into heresy.

Ok.  I understand your point.  I might even be able to accept your position, with the addition of ONE word….."It is impossible for any VALID pope to fall into heresy".  Not saying I accept this, yet, but at least I can see this as a possibility.  I can, and DO, certainly accept this, in the limited case(s) of "infallibility", as elaborated/defined by Vatican Council. BTW, I assume you believe that obstinate heresy is a sin? PAX

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Is it possible that Pius XII fell into heresy? Heresy can be entirely internal, in the heart and mind, unexpressed in word or deed. There are two possibilities. Either the Pope is able to commit heresy, or he is not. 1. If the Pope could ever possibly fall into heresy, we can never be certain which Popes fell into heresy, because heresy can be entirely internal. If so, then Pius XII could have fallen into heresy. 2. If it is impossible for any Pope to fall into heresy, because the Pope is the seat of the Sacred Magisterium, then no Pope can be accused of any kind or degree of heresy. If so, then Pius XII could not have fallen into heresy.

As I understand things, a pope can fall into personal heresy, but the Holy Spirit will prevent him from teaching it. God bless, Stephen — — Stephen Korsman www.theotokos.co.za www.theotokos.co.za/adventism IC | XC NI | KA

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – 1. If the Pope could ever possibly fall into heresy, we can never be certain which Popes fell into heresy, because heresy can be entirely internal. If so, then Pius XII could have fallen into heresy. I disagree.  Heresy "can be" entirely internal.  No argument here.  And that heresy (internal) can never be known, by the faithful, UNLESS there is private Revelation involved (and THAT is a discussion for an ENTIRELY different thread), and no other person is required to believe that "private Revelation", anyway.  Conversely, heresy can be external (or a combination of both).  And external heresy is certainly something the faithful CAN determine, one would think.  Though, "interpretation" of what is said/written plays a part, I will readily admit.  So, "we can never be certain which popes fell into heresy" is, to some degree, true.  What Catholics DO, is BELIEVE that no valid pope is EVER going to contradict the Constant and Consistant Teaching of the Church, in that pope’s Teaching on Faith and Morals;  that no valid pope is EVER going to contradict either Holy Scripture or Holy Tradition. 2. If it is impossible for any Pope to fall into heresy, because the Pope is the seat of the Sacred Magisterium, then no Pope can be accused of any kind or degree of heresy. If so, then Pius XII could not have fallen into heresy. Ok.  I understand your point.  I might even be able to accept your position, with the addition of ONE word….."It is impossible for any VALID pope to fall into heresy".  Not saying I accept this, yet, but at least I can see this as a possibility.  I can, and DO, certainly accept this, in the limited case(s) of "infallibility", as elaborated/defined by Vatican Council.

Yes, it is impossible for any valid Pope to fall into heresy. However, if you define an invalid Pope as one who has committed heresy, you end up with an obvious and meaningless statement. The Popes who are valid being only those who have not committed heresy. Certainly, one needs a valid election, acceptance by the person elected, and ordination to the episcopate, to have a valid Pope. But beyond that, I would say that such a validly elected Pope cannot fall into heresy because he is the seat of the Sacred Magisterium. BTW, I assume you believe that obstinate heresy is a sin?

Yes, a serious sin. One must be careful, though, in accusing someone of heresy because a correct theological position can easily be misunderstood or misinterpreted. Also, someone who holds a correct theological position could simply state that position akwardly or in a way which is difficult to understand. The person stating such a position would be guilty of poor writing or poor expression, but not heresy. I believe that a proper understanding of the teachings of the Popes from John XXIII to John Paul II will show that none have actually committed heresy. Ron Conte

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Is it possible that Pius XII fell into heresy? Heresy can be entirely internal, in the heart and mind, unexpressed in word or deed. There are two possibilities. Either the Pope is able to commit heresy, or he is not. 1. If the Pope could ever possibly fall into heresy, we can never be certain which Popes fell into heresy, because heresy can be entirely internal. If so, then Pius XII could have fallen into heresy. 2. If it is impossible for any Pope to fall into heresy, because the Pope is the seat of the Sacred Magisterium, then no Pope can be accused of any kind or degree of heresy. If so, then Pius XII could not have fallen into heresy. As I understand things, a pope can fall into personal heresy, but the Holy Spirit will prevent him from teaching it.

The Holy Ghost (Spirit) will prevent him from Teaching it, ex cathedra.  A pope can still teach heresy, as a private theologian. PAX lex orandi, lex credendi

Response:

As I understand things, a pope can fall into personal heresy, but the Holy Spirit will prevent him from teaching it. The Holy Ghost (Spirit) will prevent him from Teaching it, ex cathedra.  A pope can still teach heresy, as a private theologian. PAX lex orandi, lex credendi

My position is that the Pope can never fall into heresy, not even privately or personally. The Pope is not infallible, except when exercising the Sacred Magisterium (ex cathedra). Popes can make mistakes, teach something that is incorrect (even within a papal document), have personal theological opinions which are in error. But he can never fall into any kind or degree of heresy. He can never believe or teach anything contrary to the explicit teaching of the Sacred Magisterium throughout the history of the Church. If you think that a Pope can fall into heresy (but not teach it ex cathedra), do you think that the Pope loses his spiritual or temporal authority if he falls into heresy??? If the next Pope, or the one after that, is like Pius IX or X or XII, will you say that he is a valid Pope? Ron Conte

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – As I understand things, a pope can fall into personal heresy, but the Holy Spirit will prevent him from teaching it. The Holy Ghost (Spirit) will prevent him from Teaching it, ex cathedra. A pope can still teach heresy, as a private theologian. PAX lex orandi, lex credendi My position is that the Pope can never fall into heresy, not even privately or personally. The Pope is not infallible, except when exercising the Sacred Magisterium (ex cathedra). Popes can make mistakes, teach something that is incorrect (even within a papal document), have personal theological opinions which are in error. But he can never fall into any kind or degree of heresy. He can never believe or teach anything contrary to the explicit teaching of the Sacred Magisterium throughout the history of the Church.

I understand your position.  I’ve read it several times, in several threads. I don’t agree with it. If you think that a Pope can fall into heresy (but not teach it ex cathedra), do you think that the Pope loses his spiritual or temporal authority if he falls into heresy???

It is my opinion that a pope can teach heresy, as a private theologian, and not necessarily be obstinate in such heresy.  That pope, or any pope who "internally" commits heresy, does not lose temporal authority, but may temporally, at least, lose spiritual authority.  Understand that this is "speculation" on my part.  Now, a pope who taught heresy, was in error, guilty of material heresy, can repent, and regain spiritual authority.  I think this has, supposedly, happened in the past (I don’t have any references handy).  This is an area where I am still formulating exactly what I believe, striving to maintain a consistantcy with ALL the previous Teachings of the Church.  Since this area is currently, to my knowledge, NOT Dogma, it is apparently ok for me to "speculate", and question, and investigate. If the next Pope, or the one after that, is like Pius IX or X or XII, will you say that he is a valid Pope?

Any valid pope, validly "elected" (not previously guilty of heresy, formally, and unrepentant) whose teachings are consistent with the Teachings of the Church, is the pope, period.  Any "pope" who teaches anything contrary to the Teachings of the Church, MAY be a heretic, but not NECESSARILY lose temporal authority as pope, and therefore may still be the pope.  Any apparent pope, who Teaches (ex cathedra) contrary to the Teachings of the Church, CANNOT be the pope, ipso facto.  Can’t happen. "If the next pope, or the one after that", is like any valid pope, good, bad (weak), whatever, he is the pope, until proven otherwise.  "Proven" meaning obstinate, formal heresy, unrepentant DURING the papacy…..or, proven as an obstinate, formal heretic, unrepentant, prior to his "election" (which, of course, invalidates the election).  I readily admit that the "during the papacy" part REQUIRES Catholics to KNOW their Faith, in order to KNOW (with any degree of certainty) whether or not a heresy exists.  This gets back to the "vincible" vs. "invincible" thing…..maybe another thread. PAX lex orandi, lex credendi

Response:

Any valid pope, validly "elected" (not previously guilty of heresy, formally, and unrepentant) whose teachings are consistent with the Teachings of the Church, is the pope, period.  Any "pope" who teaches anything contrary to the Teachings of the Church, MAY be a heretic, but not NECESSARILY lose temporal authority as pope, and therefore may still be the pope.  Any apparent pope, who Teaches (ex cathedra) contrary to the Teachings of the Church, CANNOT be the pope, ipso facto.  Can’t happen.

The Sacred Magisterium has no teachings anything like what you are saying. You are using a set of teachings to contradict the Popes and Vatican II which have never been the teaching of the Church. Your position allows you to nullify the teachings of any Pope and any Council with which you disagree. This type of thinking was never the teaching of the Church. What is your basis for accusing Pope John XXIII, Paul VI, John Paul I and John Paul II, and Vatican II of heresy? State the teachings that you claim are heresy. Ron Conte

Response:

The Pope’s day to day discussions and directives on faith and morals are NOT infallible ex cathedra statements.  In fact, in the entire history of the Church only two ex cathedra dogmatic statements have ever been made, and both were since Vatican I.  There was a great deal of discussion about them with the Magisterium both times prior to their adoption.  The Church has a final earthly authority, but it is not a unilateral organization.  The call of Christ demands that the pope always act in consort with his brother bishops, and in consort with the sense of the faithful.  The papacy is not immune even to heresy.  We have had at least one Pope who taught things that bordered on heresy, Honorius I, I believe.  The Magisterium promptly corrected him and even discussed naming him a heretic officially after his death.  We had three people after the papacy of Innocent III who claimed to be pope, and had loyal followings, even within the diocese of Rome.  And in spite of it all, Christ himself is still and always will be the head of the church "and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it."  As a faithful Catholic Christian, I write this not to scandalize the church, and not to refute the opinions of those with whom I agree to disagree.  I write this because in the end, none of this matters.  All the logical argument, the historical reflection, the zealous research is really in the end unnecessary.  It all comes down to one thing, it always has, and it always will: "We believe in One God, the Father the Almighty". Everything else is just window dressing.  I do not presume to understand him, I just follow. Gerard – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Any valid pope, validly "elected" (not previously guilty of heresy, formally, and unrepentant) whose teachings are consistent with the Teachings of the Church, is the pope, period.  Any "pope" who teaches anything contrary to the Teachings of the Church, MAY be a heretic, but not NECESSARILY lose temporal authority as pope, and therefore may still be the pope.  Any apparent pope, who Teaches (ex cathedra) contrary to the Teachings of the Church, CANNOT be the pope, ipso facto.  Can’t happen. The Sacred Magisterium has no teachings anything like what you are saying. You are using a set of teachings to contradict the Popes and Vatican II which have never been the teaching of the Church. Your position allows you to nullify the teachings of any Pope and any Council with which you disagree. This type of thinking was never the teaching of the Church. What is your basis for accusing Pope John XXIII, Paul VI, John Paul I and John Paul II, and Vatican II of heresy? State the teachings that you claim are heresy. Ron Conte

Response:

The Pope’s day to day discussions and directives on faith and morals are NOT infallible ex cathedra statements.  

True. In fact, in the entire history of the Church only two ex cathedra dogmatic statements have ever been made, and both were since Vatican I.  

False. There are other examples of the use of Papal infallibility: Unam Sanctum issued in 1302 by Pope Boniface VIII Apostolic Letter of John Paul II, Ordinatio Sacerdotalis, May 22, 1994 and there may be more. Some scholar have attempted a list of infallible papal statments having several additional entries. There was a great deal of discussion about them with the Magisterium both times prior to their adoption.  The Church has a final earthly authority, but it is not a unilateral organization.  The call of Christ demands that the pope always act in consort with his brother bishops, and in consort with the sense of the faithful.  

Vatican I and Vatican II both defined that the Pope has the ability to teach infallibly by his sole authority, without the other Bishops and without the sense of the faithful, without the consent or agreement of anyone else. This statement: "The call of Christ demands that the pope always act in consort with his brother bishops, and in consort with the sense of the faithful." is heresy because it contradicts the infallible teachings of Vatican I and II. The papacy is not immune even to heresy.  

The Pope is the seat of the Sacred Magisterium, therefore he can never fall into heresy. We have had at least one Pope who taught things that bordered on heresy, Honorius I, I believe.  

The question was about the relationship between Christ’s Divinity and His Humanity. Honorius I did not decide the question and did not teach anything. The Magisterium promptly corrected him

Who are you claiming exercised the Magisterium in contradiction to a pope? and even discussed naming him a heretic officially after his death.  

Sixth Ecumenical Council condemned his point of view, found in one statement in one of his letters, 50 years after his death. Councils are not infallible in everything they say and do, only in final definitions of doctrine. Ron Conte

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – The Pope’s day to day discussions and directives on faith and morals are NOT infallible ex cathedra statements.   True. In fact, in the entire history of the Church only two ex cathedra dogmatic statements have ever been made, and both were since Vatican I.   False. There are other examples of the use of Papal infallibility: Unam Sanctum issued in 1302 by Pope Boniface VIII Apostolic Letter of John Paul II, Ordinatio Sacerdotalis, May 22, 1994 and there may be more. Some scholar have attempted a list of infallible papal statments having several additional entries.

The Doctrine of the Assumtion of Mary and the Doctrine of the Coronation of Mary are the only two ex cathedra statements made since its formal definition at Vatican I.  Ordinatio Sacredotalis was a Point of Silence, forbidding discussion of a delicate topic for the sake of unity.  It was not an ex cathedra statement about the priesthood.  One may come in the future, or better yet, an Ecumenical Council settling the matter according the the Spirit’s will, but that particular document’s focus was preserving Christian unity by keeping us from unproductive discussion about a topic we are not ready to discuss charitably. There was a great deal of discussion about them with the Magisterium both times prior to their adoption.  The Church has a final earthly authority, but it is not a unilateral organization.  The call of Christ demands that the pope always act in consort with his brother bishops, and in consort with the sense of the faithful.   Vatican I and Vatican II both defined that the Pope has the ability to teach infallibly by his sole authority, without the other Bishops and without the sense of the faithful, without the consent or agreement of anyone else.

That is partially true.  The church is a community of believers. The Pope would never make a unilateral statement which was contrary to his brother bishops, or to the Sense of the Faithful. This statement: "The call of Christ demands that the pope always act in consort with his brother bishops, and in consort with the sense of the faithful." is heresy because it contradicts the infallible teachings of Vatican I and II.

It is not.  The bishops are not employees of the Pope, they are the sucessors to the Apostles and are worthy of the greatest respect.  The bishops coversely would never make a statement at Council contrary to an ex cathedra statement.  We claim papal infallability BECAUSE of the Sensus Fidei, to discount it as subservient to anyone other than the Spirit undermines papal infallability itself.  That is not to say current whims of a particular generation of the faithful constitutes Divine Revelation.  Sensus Fidei is developed over centuries, it is codified at Council, and occasionally by ex cathedra statement. The papacy is not immune even to heresy.   The Pope is the seat of the Sacred Magisterium, therefore he can never fall into heresy.

He can be a heretic, he cannot officially teach heresy by ex cathedra statement. It has only happened once anyway, so the Spirit is a pretty effective force in the spiritual life of the Magisterium. We have had at least one Pope who taught things that bordered on heresy, Honorius I, I believe.   The question was about the relationship between Christ’s Divinity and His Humanity. Honorius I did not decide the question and did not teach anything.

That is correct, and it is why I said he was a borderline heretic.  He was a good man and people learned by his example.  That was why his Christology was so important–people tend to accept the views of those whom they respect. The Magisterium promptly corrected him Who are you claiming exercised the Magisterium in contradiction to a pope?

They did not.  His successor in consort with the Magisterium reiterated the positions of the previous five Ecumenical Councils; namely, that Jesus was and is both fully human, and fully divine. and even discussed naming him a heretic officially after his death.   Sixth Ecumenical Council condemned his point of view, found in one statement in one of his letters, 50 years after his death. Councils are not infallible in everything they say and do, only in final

This is true, however, any official dogmatic statement which comes from an Ecumenical Council is Infallable.  The Pope does not have "veto power" over them, nor would he want it, as ours is a Apostolic Church of unity.  There are no unprecedented unilateral statements from the Holy Spirit. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Ron Conte

Response:

The Pope’s day to day discussions and directives on faith and morals are NOT infallible ex cathedra statements.   [snip]

For a detailed analysis of how the passage of the infallibility dogma was orchestrated, I would recommend the book by the Catholic priest August Bernhard Hasler: "HOW THE POPE BECAME INFALLIBLE: Pius IX and the Politics of Persuation," Doubleday (1981) [translation of "WIE DER PAPST UNFEHLBAR WURDE: Macht und Ohnmacht eines Dogmas," R. Piper & Co. Verlag (1979)]. It is important to be informed and to speak up about this issues. Domenico Rosa

Response:

Question:

Just rereading Mad Alberts favourite book. Amazing how religion kills people. I was reading about some pogroms in the 11th. century in Europe during the Crusades and how some crazed mobs attacked Jews. Frequently the Jews were defended by Bishops,

The thesis of the book is that the pogroms stem from Catholic/Christian theology. And later Protestant writings. They were planned and directed by the Church officials — not crazed mobs. The author is very thorough and detailed in documenting that fact. To select one snippet that shows the flavor the copious damming information, on page 213, "Should we be surprised that not long after these sermons were preached, there were several violent outbursts against the Jews …". Much of it was due to higher level officials. It wasn’t until the Nazi’s came along that the pathological thinking that the church built into the culture was hijacked by forces outside the church. Stan but the startling point was that the Jewish belief in the here after led Jews to their death. Instead of converting [a few did] they frequently killed themselves and their children to avoid being murdered, all because of a false belief in God.

I don’t think that the author said that. He claims to still be Catholic. Please site page numbers if you can. (Paperback if possible.) Stan – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -Is God believing deadlier than smoking?.

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Just rereading Mad Alberts favourite book. Amazing how religion kills people. I was reading about some pogroms in the 11th. century in Europe during the Crusades and how some crazed mobs attacked Jews. Frequently the Jews were defended by Bishops, The thesis of the book is that the pogroms stem from Catholic/Christian theology. And later Protestant writings. They were planned and directed by the Church officials — not crazed mobs. The author is very thorough and detailed in documenting that fact. To select one snippet that shows the flavor the copious damming information, on page 213, "Should we be surprised that not long after these sermons were preached, there were several violent outbursts against the Jews …". Much of it was due to higher level officials. It wasn’t until the Nazi’s came along that the pathological thinking that the church built into the culture was hijacked by forces outside the church. Stan but the startling point was that the Jewish belief in the here after led Jews to their death. Instead of converting [a few did] they frequently killed themselves and their children to avoid being murdered, all because of a false belief in God. I don’t think that the author said that. He claims to still be Catholic. Please site page numbers if you can. (Paperback if possible.)

Hardback Pg 262/263

Response:

Just rereading Mad Alberts favourite book. Amazing how religion kills people. I was reading about some pogroms in the 11th. century in Europe during the Crusades and how some crazed mobs attacked Jews. Frequently the Jews were defended by Bishops,

And far more frequently the attacks were initiated by some priest exhorting the mob to "get the Christ killers". – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -The thesis of the book is that the pogroms stem from Catholic/Christian theology. And later Protestant writings. They were planned and directed by the Church officials — not crazed mobs. The author is very thorough and detailed in documenting that fact. To select one snippet that shows the flavor the copious damming information, on page 213, "Should we be surprised that not long after these sermons were preached, there were several violent outbursts against the Jews …". Much of it was due to higher level officials. It wasn’t until the Nazi’s came along that the pathological thinking that the church built into the culture was hijacked by forces outside the church. Stan but the startling point was that the Jewish belief in the here after led Jews to their death. Instead of converting [a few did] they frequently killed themselves and their children to avoid being murdered, all because of a false belief in God. I don’t think that the author said that. He claims to still be Catholic. Please site page numbers if you can. (Paperback if possible.) Stan Is God believing deadlier than smoking?.

–  Adam Littman                               /     ^                                              /    ( ) ( )/                                                  /  o  /    /                                            /  ( )/    /      Baldric, you owe me a groat"                   /         –Blackadder                           /   /

Response:

Question:

writes: <snip No, I disagree.  No conditional baptism.

I agree it’s not necessary, but it may be quicker.  All I’m saying is that it might be quicker to have a conditional baptism than trying to explain all this to some school administrator.  Your story below illustrates this point: you had to keep telling the church secretary the correct thing and she wasn’t getting it. At worst a conditional baptism is meaningless; but it is probably quicker than dealing with church secretaries or school administrators. <g  What you should do is ask the pastor to talk to the school.  Your child was baptized into the Lutheran Christian Community, but now you want him to belong to the Catholic Christian Community. At that age all that is for the pastor formally welcome your child into the Church community, then inform the school.  We’ve had a mother "convert" and her two daughters, under 7, we welcomed into the Church along with her.  Then when they reached catechetical age they were confirmed and received First Communion. I’ve run into this when a child who was in the same situation then grew up and went to get married.  The secretary at the marrying parish kept telling me it was a mixed marriage since he’d been baptized in the United Church and I kept telling her "no, he came to the Catholic Church when he was about 6, made his first communion and was confirmed in our Church so he’s Catholic, regardless of what his Baptismal Certificate says.

Russ

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – If a child was baptised in the Lutheran church and the parents now want to have the child now raised Catholic or "convert" to Catholicism – how does one go about this? The father is Lutheran, the mother is Catholic. We were told by one church that as long as the child was under 7 years of age, the child could "become" Catholic by simply making this request to a priest, but after the age of 7, the child would have to either give consent and/or go through the CCD classes… is this true? Then, later we were told that the age does not matter, to just make sure the child goes to the CCD classes and subsequent sacraments, etc.. and the child will be considered Catholic. Is there some certificate that a child before the age of 7 receives to show that the child is now "Catholic"? When the parents went to enroll the child in a Catholic school for first grade, the school requested the child’s baptismal certificate, and when they saw it was from a Lutheran church, they considered her religion to be Lutheran, even though the child had attended CCD classes in the same church in her Kindergarten year.  (She did not attend the Catholic School for Kindergarten, only the CCD classes on Sundays). At what point does the child actually become "Catholic" and is the age of 7 really a factor? Thanks for your input, Donna

Donna, The catholic church recognizes a lutheran baptism, so there is no need to rebaptize.   Make the child’s school aware that the parents wish for the child to convert to catholism.  After the child attends catholic school, and participates in the rites of reconcilliation and communion, (usually second grade or age 7ish) then, I do believe, she will be ‘catholic’. Paula —

Response:

Donna I do not question your motives just your timing. Why place a child in an organization that has a history of abusing children from an organization that doesn’t particularly have that problem? Don’t you like your child? And they ask why there are so many abortions!

Response:

(Cunneen) writes: <<No, I disagree.  No conditional baptism. I agree it’s not necessary, but it may be quicker.  All I’m saying is that it might be quicker to have a conditional baptism than trying to explain all this to some school administrator.  Your story below illustrates this point: you had to keep telling the church secretary the correct thing and she wasn’t getting it. Quicker and grossly insulting to the Lutherans.

Shhhh. Not if we don’t tell them <g They might be more insulted by the papists poaching one of their own.  Total ecumenical insensitivity

Anyway, considering we don’t recognize their orders and their Eucharist, I hardly think adding baptism to the list at this point will make anything worse. and bad theology!

Not bad at all. In fact, it would be the perfect opportunity to teach the young girl about Catholic doctrine on baptism.  The Church has conditional baptisms *for a reason*. Lutheran baptism IS baptism.

A point I made myself.  Conditional baptism casts doubt on it’s validity, and therefore should NEVER be used unless there is really a significant doubt about whether the baptism OCCURRED.  That does not apply in this case.

OK, but 20 years from now when that same girl is having the same problem your friend did and having to go back and forth with some Church secretary about scheduling a wedding, I hope they’ll remember my advice. Anyway, hopefully she’ll talk to the priest and get it sorted out that way. Russ

Response:

writes: Donna I do not question your motives just your timing. Why place a child in an organization that has a history of abusing children from an organization that doesn’t particularly have that problem?

As opposed to what? An organization like the Lutheran Church which was knee-deep in the Holocaust Don’t you like your child? And they ask why there are so many abortions!

Russ

Response:

Donna I do not question your motives just your timing. Why place a child in an organization that has a history of abusing children from an organization that doesn’t particularly have that problem? Don’t you like your child? And they ask why there are so many abortions!

ya need a slap upside the head!!! geesh…. Paula —

Response:

<<No, I disagree.  No conditional baptism. I agree it’s not necessary, but it may be quicker.  All I’m saying is that it might be quicker to have a conditional baptism than trying to explain all this to some school administrator.  Your story below illustrates this point: you had to keep telling the church secretary the correct thing and she wasn’t getting it. Quicker and grossly insulting to the Lutherans.  Total ecumenical insensitivity and bad theology! Lutheran baptism IS baptism.  Conditional baptism casts doubt on it’s validity, and therefore should NEVER be used unless there is really a significant doubt about whether the baptism OCCURRED.  That does not apply in this case.

Response:

If a child was baptised in the Lutheran church and the parents now want to have the child now raised Catholic or "convert" to Catholicism – how does one go about this? The father is Lutheran, the mother is Catholic. We were told by one church that as long as the child was under 7 years of age, the child could "become" Catholic by simply making this request to a priest, but after the age of 7, the child would have to either give consent and/or go through the CCD classes… is this true? Then, later we were told that the age does not matter, to just make sure the child goes to the CCD classes and subsequent sacraments, etc.. and the child will be considered Catholic. Is there some certificate that a child before the age of 7 receives to show that the child is now "Catholic"? When the parents went to enroll the child in a Catholic school for first grade, the school requested the child’s baptismal certificate, and when they saw it was from a Lutheran church, they considered her religion to be Lutheran, even though the child had attended CCD classes in the same church in her Kindergarten year.  (She did not attend the Catholic School for Kindergarten, only the CCD classes on Sundays). At what point does the child actually become "Catholic" and is the age of 7 really a factor? Thanks for your input, Donna

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – If a child was baptised in the Lutheran church and the parents now want to have the child now raised Catholic or "convert" to Catholicism – how does one go about this? The father is Lutheran, the mother is Catholic. We were told by one church that as long as the child was under 7 years of age, the child could "become" Catholic by simply making this request to a priest, but after the age of 7, the child would have to either give consent and/or go through the CCD classes… is this true? Then, later we were told that the age does not matter, to just make sure the child goes to the CCD classes and subsequent sacraments, etc.. and the child will be considered Catholic. Is there some certificate that a child before the age of 7 receives to show that the child is now "Catholic"? When the parents went to enroll the child in a Catholic school for first grade, the school requested the child’s baptismal certificate, and when they saw it was from a Lutheran church, they considered her religion to be Lutheran, even though the child had attended CCD classes in the same church in her Kindergarten year.  (She did not attend the Catholic School for Kindergarten, only the CCD classes on Sundays). At what point does the child actually become "Catholic" and is the age of 7 really a factor?

A Lutheran baptism is recognized by the Catholic Church, so all they should have to do is register the child in the school.  She would receive her religious education in the school obviously.   It sounds like the person they are dealing with at the school is somewhat ignorant of the Church doctrine under which there’s no such thing as a ‘Lutheran baptism’ or a ‘Catholic’ baptism – only a valid or invalid baptism. They might just want to talk to the priest and have him talk to the administration.  In order to be "sure", the priest might do a conditional baptism which is sort of a back-up just in case there was some defect in the Lutheran baptism (highly unlikely).  In the likely event, the Lutheran baptism was valid, the conditional baptism has no spiritual effect as the Church teaches there is only one baptism for the forgiveness of sins (as in the Nicene Creed).  In fact, rather than go through the rigamarole, it might just be easier to ask the priest for a conditional baptism. Russ

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – It sounds like the person they are dealing with at the school is somewhat ignorant of the Church doctrine under which there’s no such thing as a ‘Lutheran baptism’ or a ‘Catholic’ baptism – only a valid or invalid baptism. They might just want to talk to the priest and have him talk to the administration.  In order to be "sure", the priest might do a conditional baptism which is sort of a back-up just in case there was some defect in the Lutheran baptism (highly unlikely).  In the likely event, the Lutheran baptism was valid, the conditional baptism has no spiritual effect as the Church teaches there is only one baptism for the forgiveness of sins (as in the Nicene Creed).  In fact, rather than go through the rigamarole, it might just be easier to ask the priest for a conditional baptism.

No, I disagree.  No conditional baptism.  What you should do is ask the pastor to talk to the school.  Your child was baptized into the Lutheran Christian Community, but now you want him to belong to the Catholic Christian Community. At that age all that is for the pastor formally welcome your child into the Church community, then inform the school.  We’ve had a mother "convert" and her two daughters, under 7, we welcomed into the Church along with her.  Then when they reached catechetical age they were confirmed and received First Communion. I’ve run into this when a child who was in the same situation then grew up and went to get married.  The secretary at the marrying parish kept telling me it was a mixed marriage since he’d been baptized in the United Church and I kept telling her "no, he came to the Catholic Church when he was about 6, made his first communion and was confirmed in our Church so he’s Catholic, regardless of what his Baptismal Certificate says. Suzanne

Response:

:: If a child was baptised in the Lutheran church and the parents now :: want to have the child now raised Catholic or "convert" to :: Catholicism – how does one go about this? :: :: The father is Lutheran, the mother is Catholic. :: :: We were told by one church that as long as the child was under 7 :: years of age, the child could "become" Catholic by simply making this :: request to a priest, but after the age of 7, the child would have to :: either give consent and/or go through the CCD classes… is this :: true? :: :: Then, later we were told that the age does not matter, to just make :: sure the child goes to the CCD classes and subsequent sacraments, :: etc.. and the child will be considered Catholic. :: :: Is there some certificate that a child before the age of 7 receives :: to show that the child is now "Catholic"? :: :: When the parents went to enroll the child in a Catholic school for :: first grade, the school requested the child’s baptismal certificate, :: and when they saw it was from a Lutheran church, they considered her :: religion to be Lutheran, even though the child had attended CCD :: classes in the same church in her Kindergarten year.  (She did not :: attend the Catholic School for Kindergarten, only the CCD classes on :: Sundays). :: :: At what point does the child actually become "Catholic" and is the :: age of 7 really a factor? :: :: Thanks for your input, :: Donna Around these parts, at least before age 7, the child has to make a profession of faith before the priest. The Church requires some sort of documentation, so you would get a certificate. A Lutheran baptism is unquestionably valid so there would be no new baptism. The age 7 requirement, I expect, has to do with receiving Communion. That, IIRC, is the usual age for First Communion. AFAIK, it’s up to each diocese to establish the policies, but each parish has some latitude to cover individual cases. Your PP (parish priest) should be able to give you the final word. Steve

Response:

Question:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Pink Floyd – Mother (written against Fascist oppression) How do you get WTS out of that?    While Hitler’s fascist regime would literally execute you for not conforming to the ideology of the day, the Watchtower Society claims you will be executed ‘eternally’ for not conforming to the ideology of the day. EE

Ahhh.  I see the similarity.

Response:

Pink Floyd – Mother (written against Fascist oppression)

How do you get WTS out of that?

Response:

Proud to be an American. Lee Greenwood, wasn’t it?

American by birth. Southern by the grace of God.

Response:

I always try to respond to those that other people ignore.

One of those "do your way unto others that are ignored" principles, eh! EE

Response:

Pink Floyd – Mother (written against Fascist oppression) How do you get WTS out of that?

    While Hitler’s fascist regime would literally execute you for not conforming to the ideology of the day, the Watchtower Society claims you will be executed ‘eternally’ for not conforming to the ideology of the day. EE

Response:

Yours is basically the same desire to dehumanize those who disagree with you. And I read everything you write to me – even to others. So in that sense, yes, unfortunately I see a lot of Nazism everytime I read one of your obscene replies. You’ve got hitler on the brain, blanche… Why do I have this picture in my head of you sitting in a room full of swastikas and nazi "memoribilia"?

Because you’re desperate, at this point? If you don’t like the obvious comparison, then don’t do what you do. Peace.  * When one finds nothing more to say to God,  * but just knows He is there —  * that, in itself, is the best of prayers. [Fr. John Vianney, priest of Ars township, France, 1859]    http://www.newsgroups.com       The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! —–= Over 100,000 Newsgroups – Unlimited Fast Downloads – 19 Servers =—–

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – So I guess you will be continuing your trolling activities on arcrc?        I don’t believe in trolls.  Besides the name calling, a predominate feature of newsgroups is designed for debate, no matter how ugly the facts may be. Onward! Forward! Not what you were saying a few months ago.     Your obsession with classifying people as trolls or trolling is inexcusable.  You know the rules of usenet. Yes I do, and once a troll, always a troll.     Your so cool Scout Lady. . . .  Not. Have a nice day defending idolatry. 2 Timothy 3:1-9     You’re mean for a professed Catholic christian, Scout Lady.     Your fruitage of the God’s spirit is not one I would desire to imitate. (Gal 5:22,23) X-racer And you’re still a lost fruitcake.     Name calling with words like ‘fruitcake’ has to be the resort of a frustrated and desperate NG participant.  BTW, do you think X-racer is a lost homosexual or crazy person? Nope, just a troll.     As if I am plastered all over the A.R.C.R-C newsgroup antagonizing Scouts everywhere? I presented a argument.  Your response was X-racer is a troll. I haven’t forgotten your threats to pollute arcrc should I try to have a honest conversation with anyone in the JW newsgroup. Sorry but I wouldn’t expect too many responses as you were massively killfiled as a result of your trollish and childish behavior. You only get one chance to make a first impression, you were simply written off.

Which baffles the mind why you are still around. Uncle Bob    http://www.newsgroups.com       The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! —–= Over 100,000 Newsgroups – Unlimited Fast Downloads – 19 Servers =—–

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – So I guess you will be continuing your trolling activities on arcrc?        I don’t believe in trolls.  Besides the name calling, a predominate feature of newsgroups is designed for debate, no matter how ugly the facts may be. Onward! Forward! Not what you were saying a few months ago.     Your obsession with classifying people as trolls or trolling is inexcusable.  You know the rules of usenet. Yes I do, and once a troll, always a troll.     Your so cool Scout Lady. . . .  Not. Have a nice day defending idolatry. 2 Timothy 3:1-9     You’re mean for a professed Catholic christian, Scout Lady.     Your fruitage of the God’s spirit is not one I would desire to imitate. (Gal 5:22,23) X-racer And you’re still a lost fruitcake.     Name calling with words like ‘fruitcake’ has to be the resort of a frustrated and desperate NG participant.  BTW, do you think X-racer is a lost homosexual or crazy person? Nope, just a troll.

    As if I am plastered all over the A.R.C.R-C newsgroup antagonizing Scouts everywhere? I presented a argument.  Your response was X-racer is a troll. X-racer What is called fashion is the tradition of the moment. Goethe – The Maxims and Reflections of Goethe

Response:

Yours is basically the same desire to dehumanize those who disagree with you. And I read everything you write to me – even to others. So in that sense, yes, unfortunately I see a lot of Nazism everytime I read one of your obscene replies. You’ve got hitler on the brain, blanche… Why do I have this picture in my head of you sitting in a room full of swastikas and nazi "memoribilia"? Because you’re desperate, at this point?

Because YOU’RE the nazi? Seems like it to me. If you don’t like the obvious comparison, then don’t do what you do.

I don’t care WHAT bullshit you come up with… you’re still a sniveling, disgusting, putrified, half-assed, worthless, sub-human, piece of fecked up slime. Peace.

Yeah… blanche says "peace" as the panzers roll over the border. Steve — Blanche on onions: "No no. dad same onion – to me, soon post Pee."

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – And ‘Legs’ screamed: The above characterization brought to you by vile people at "Blanche, Inc." "you sniveling pile of inhuman offal, you’re a bastard" "Just stomping on a cockroach… with my "legs"… blanche." Oh come on now To which I replied, at the time: Yeah – it’s called the goosestep. You seem to know an awful lot about nazis Yours is basically the same desire to dehumanize those who disagree with you. And I read everything you write to me – even to others. So in that sense, yes, unfortunately I see a lot of Nazism everytime I read one of your obscene replies.

You’ve got hitler on the brain, blanche… Why do I have this picture in my head of you sitting in a room full of swastikas and nazi "memoribilia"? It certainly is true that many of the radical european "traditionalists" are openly nazis… maybe you’ve spent too much time with them? Peace.

Smurf you too. Steve — Blanche on the end of the world: "It will all just be hen Pee."

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – So I guess you will be continuing your trolling activities on arcrc?        I don’t believe in trolls.  Besides the name calling, a predominate feature of newsgroups is designed for debate, no matter how ugly the facts may be. Onward! Forward! Not what you were saying a few months ago.     Your obsession with classifying people as trolls or trolling is inexcusable.  You know the rules of usenet. Yes I do, and once a troll, always a troll.     Your so cool Scout Lady. . . .  Not. Have a nice day defending idolatry. 2 Timothy 3:1-9     You’re mean for a professed Catholic christian, Scout Lady.     Your fruitage of the God’s spirit is not one I would desire to imitate. (Gal 5:22,23) X-racer And you’re still a lost fruitcake.     Name calling with words like ‘fruitcake’ has to be the resort of a frustrated and desperate NG participant.  BTW, do you think X-racer is a lost homosexual or crazy person? Nope, just a troll.     As if I am plastered all over the A.R.C.R-C newsgroup antagonizing Scouts everywhere? I presented a argument.  Your response was X-racer is a troll. I haven’t forgotten your threats to pollute arcrc should I try to have a honest conversation with anyone in the JW newsgroup. Sorry but I wouldn’t expect too many responses as you were massively killfiled as a result of your trollish and childish behavior. You only get one chance to make a first impression, you were simply written off. Which baffles the mind why you are still around. Considering your posts, your mind is baffled easily.

I’m thankful they are of a quality that has deserved your full attention. Uncle Bob    http://www.newsgroups.com       The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! —–= Over 100,000 Newsgroups – Unlimited Fast Downloads – 19 Servers =—–

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – So I guess you will be continuing your trolling activities on arcrc?        I don’t believe in trolls.  Besides the name calling, a predominate feature of newsgroups is designed for debate, no matter how ugly the facts may be. Onward! Forward! Not what you were saying a few months ago.     Your obsession with classifying people as trolls or trolling is inexcusable.  You know the rules of usenet. Yes I do, and once a troll, always a troll.     Your so cool Scout Lady. . . .  Not. Have a nice day defending idolatry. 2 Timothy 3:1-9     You’re mean for a professed Catholic christian, Scout Lady.     Your fruitage of the God’s spirit is not one I would desire to imitate. (Gal 5:22,23) X-racer And you’re still a lost fruitcake.

    Name calling with words like ‘fruitcake’ has to be the resort of a frustrated and desperate NG participant.  BTW, do you think X-racer is a lost homosexual or crazy person? EE

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – And ‘Legs’ screamed: The above characterization brought to you by vile people at "Blanche, Inc." "you sniveling pile of inhuman offal, you’re a bastard" "Just stomping on a cockroach… with my "legs"… blanche."

Oh come on now, I’ve marked you exactly as you are. By all means, keep reminding "everyone". To which I replied, at the time: Yeah – it’s called the goosestep.

You seem to know an awful lot about nazis blanche… Peace.

And they healed the breach of the daughter of my people disgracefully, saying: Peace, peace: when there was no peace. Steve — Blanche on the end of the world: "It will all just be hen Pee."

Response:

And ‘Legs’ screamed: The above characterization brought to you by vile people at "Blanche, Inc." "you sniveling pile of inhuman offal, you’re a bastard" "Just stomping on a cockroach… with my "legs"… blanche." Oh come on now To which I replied, at the time: Yeah – it’s called the goosestep. You seem to know an awful lot about nazis

Yours is basically the same desire to dehumanize those who disagree with you. And I read everything you write to me – even to others. So in that sense, yes, unfortunately I see a lot of Nazism everytime I read one of your obscene replies. Peace.  * When one finds nothing more to say to God,  * but just knows He is there —  * that, in itself, is the best of prayers. [Fr. John Vianney, priest of Ars township, France, 1859]    http://www.newsgroups.com       The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! —–= Over 100,000 Newsgroups – Unlimited Fast Downloads – 19 Servers =—–

Response:

Pink Floyd – Mother (written against Fascist oppression) Vague lyrics always – could mean anything, and nothing.

Sort of like "it *appears* invalid on the face." Could mean anything, or nothing at all. It could just be about not even over-protective mothers. A song against "Fascist oppression", by which you surely include Commie oppression, as well, would probably more likely be – Proud to be an American. Lee Greenwood, wasn’t it?

<hurl, <vomit, <comet THAT from a man who claims to prefer chant and polyphony? Well, there’s simply no accounting for taste… or the lack thereof. And WTS?

Try to keep up with the threads blanche. Peace.

translated: "nobody wants a piece of me." Steve — Welcome to the Royal Palace on Planet Blanche.

Response:

And WTS? Watch Tower Society

    Yes, I have left the WTS, but I have no desire to go back to the Black, Red and Supreme White clothed elite’s of the R.C.C.   They can imagine that they are literally eating christ’s flesh and drinking christ’s blood while bowing before the idolatrous cross.  They can pray to saints and Mary as well as their trinity god who can not explain to them what they will be doing in heaven.  The catholic icons will not answer their request regarding "why God permitted suffering in our present age" with any scriptural authority.  Instead, the R.C.C. will encourage their adherents to join in carnal war along with the protestants so as to kill christians of their own faiths and others. The R.C.C. is still just a royal slut (harlot) awaiting her destruction by God, the Almighty.  The bible doesn’t insult the R.C.C. or protestant counterparts, it just lovingly and truthfully tells sincere christians to "get out of her." Revelation 18:4-10  (LVB) 4.  Then I heard another voice calling from heaven, "Come away from her, my people; do not take part in her sins, or you will be punished with her. 5  For her sins are piled as high as heaven and God is ready to judge her for her crimes. 6  Do to her as she has done to you, and more–give double penalty for all her evil deeds. She brewed many a cup of woe for others–give twice as much to her.  7.  She has lived in luxury and pleasure–match it now with torments and with sorrows. She boasts, ‘I am queen upon my throne. I am no helpless widow. I will not experience sorrow.’ 8  Therefore the sorrows of death and mourning and famine shall overtake her in a single day, and she shall be utterly consumed by fire; for mighty is the Lord who judges her.” 9 And the world leaders, who took part in her immoral acts and enjoyed her favors, will mourn for her as they see the smoke rising from her charred remains.  10.  They will stand far off, trembling with fear and crying out, "Alas, Babylon, that mighty city! In one moment her judgment fell.” Revelation 17:15-18  (LVB) 15.  "The oceans, lakes and rivers that the woman is sitting on represent masses of people of every race and nation. 16 "The scarlet animal and his ten horns–which represent ten kings who will reign with him–all hate the woman, and will attack her and leave her naked and ravaged by fire. 17 For God will put a plan into their minds, a plan that will carry out his purposes: They will mutually agree to give their authority to the scarlet animal, so that the words of God will be fulfilled. 18 And this woman you saw in your vision represents the great city that rules over the kings of the earth.” X-racer

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – So I guess you will be continuing your trolling activities on arcrc?        I don’t believe in trolls.  Besides the name calling, a predominate feature of newsgroups is designed for debate, no matter how ugly the facts may be. Onward! Forward! Not what you were saying a few months ago.     Your obsession with classifying people as trolls or trolling is inexcusable.  You know the rules of usenet. Yes I do, and once a troll, always a troll.     Your so cool Scout Lady. . . .  Not. Have a nice day defending idolatry. 2 Timothy 3:1-9

    You’re mean for a professed Catholic christian, Scout Lady.     Your fruitage of the God’s spirit is not one I would desire to imitate. (Gal 5:22,23) X-racer Never ascribe to an opponent motives meaner than your own. J. M. Barrie – St. Andrew’s University (Scotland)

Response:

And ‘Legs’ screamed: The above characterization brought to you by vile people at "Blanche, Inc."

"you sniveling pile of inhuman offal, you’re a bastard" "Just stomping on a cockroach… with my "legs"… blanche."

To which I replied, at the time: Yeah – it’s called the goosestep. Peace.  * When one finds nothing more to say to God,  * but just knows He is there —  * that, in itself, is the best of prayers. [Fr. John Vianney, priest of Ars township, France, 1859]    http://www.newsgroups.com       The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! —–= Over 100,000 Newsgroups – Ulimited Fast Downloads – 19 Servers =—–

Response:

And ‘Legs’ screamed:

The above characterization brought to you by vile people at "Blanche, Inc." Sort of like "it *appears* invalid on the face." Could mean anything or nothing at all. You just keep thinkin on it, ‘Legs’. If it’ll help, http://www.geocities.com/***censored***.htm

Puhleeze. Blanche, you do realize that the only people who hold to your heresy are those in schism… You are flat alone on earth. Peace.

Translated: "I’m adrift in a sea of my own urine." Steve — Blanche on the end of the world: "It will all just be hen Pee."

Response:

So I guess you will be continuing your trolling activities on arcrc?

       I don’t believe in trolls.  Besides the name calling, a predominate feature of newsgroups is designed for debate, no matter how ugly the facts may be. Onward! Forward!     Your obsession with classifying people as trolls or trolling is inexcusable.  You know the rules of usenet. X-racer It is easier to deceive than to undeceive. Napoleon – In the Words of Napoleon

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – So I guess you will be continuing your trolling activities on arcrc?        I don’t believe in trolls.  Besides the name calling, a predominate feature of newsgroups is designed for debate, no matter how ugly the facts may be. Onward! Forward! Not what you were saying a few months ago.     Your obsession with classifying people as trolls or trolling is inexcusable.  You know the rules of usenet. Yes I do, and once a troll, always a troll.

    Your so cool Scout Lady. . . .  Not. Have a nice day defending idolatry. EE

Response:

And ‘Legs’ screamed: Sort of like "it *appears* invalid on the face." Could mean anything

You just keep thinkin on it, ‘Legs’. If it’ll help, http://www.geocities.com/ymjcath/MassNote.htm Peace. One mark of a deteriorating society is when its people cannot discern truth from lies. Another is when they don’t even bother to try and will believe whatever their itching ears want to hear. [Cal Thomas, 4 SEP 2000]    http://www.newsgroups.com       The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! —–= Over 100,000 Newsgroups – Ulimited Fast Downloads – 19 Servers =—–

Response:

Pink Floyd – Mother (written against Fascist oppression)

Vague lyrics always – could mean anything, and nothing. It could just be about not even over-protective mothers. A song against "Fascist oppression", by which you surely include Commie oppression, as well, would probably more likely be – Proud to be an American. Lee Greenwood, wasn’t it? And WTS? Peace.  * When one finds nothing more to say to God,  * but just knows He is there —  * that, in itself, is the best of prayers. [Fr. John Vianney, priest of Ars township, France, 1859]    http://www.newsgroups.com       The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! —–= Over 100,000 Newsgroups – Ulimited Fast Downloads – 19 Servers =—–

Response:

Pink Floyd – Mother (written against Fascist oppression) Mother, do you think they’ll drop the bomb? Mother, do you think they’ll like this song? Mother, do you think they’ll try to break my balls? Ooooowaa , should I build a wall? Mother, should I run for President? Mother, should I trust the government? Mother, will they put me in the firing line? Ooooowaa Is it just a waste of time? Hush, my baby. Baby, don’t you cry. Momma’s gonna make all of your nightmares come true. Momma’s gonna put all of her fears into you. Momma’s gonna keep you right here under her wing. She won’t let you fly, but she might let you sing. Momma’s gonna keep Baby cozy and warm. Oooo Babe. Oooo Babe. Ooo Babe, of course Momma’s gonna help build a wall. Mother, do you think she’s good enough, For me? Mother, do you think she’s dangerous, To me? Mother will she tear your little boy apart? Ooooowaa , will she break my heart? Hush, my baby. Baby, don’t you cry. Momma’s gonna check out all your girlfriends for you. Momma won’t let anyone dirty get through. Momma’s gonna wait up until you get in. Momma will always find out where you’ve been. Momma’s gonna keep Baby healthy and clean. Oooo Babe. Oooo Babe. Ooo Babe, you’ll always be Baby to me. Mother, did it need to be so high?

Response:

Question:

IOW, you don’t care that your church teaches false doctrine? I’m a Catholic, my church doesn’t teach false doctrine.

Ho Hum!!! more lies.

Response:

IOW, you don’t care that your church teaches false doctrine? I’m a Catholic, my church doesn’t teach false doctrine. Ho Hum!!! more lies.

More lies from YOU.

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – in article Hey, After scrolling over the posts in this newsgroup over the last couple of days, and I am sure this has been going on for as long as this ng has been in existence, I see many posts that deal with ‘how wrong the Catholic Faith is". Pardon my rudeness, but, I really don’t care about the ‘errors of my faith’ based on the ‘chosen faiths of others’.  Bantering back and forth about what is and is not catholic faith is one thing, but, c’mon people…. I have no desire to ‘point out the errors of others faiths’ based on my faith.  So, do likewise…. IOW, you don’t care that your church teaches false doctrine? No, I don’t care what you think my church teaches.

I know what your church teaches. And I know what your church doesn’t teach: the Truth. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Paula

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Hey, After scrolling over the posts in this newsgroup over the last couple of days, and I am sure this has been going on for as long as this ng has been in existence, I see many posts that deal with ‘how wrong the Catholic Faith is". Pardon my rudeness, but, I really don’t care about the ‘errors of my faith’ based on the ‘chosen faiths of others’.  Bantering back and forth about what is and is not catholic faith is one thing, but, c’mon people…. I have no desire to ‘point out the errors of others faiths’ based on my faith.  So, do likewise…. Paula If you don’t care about the errors of your faith, then you don’t care about goodness and truth, because "errors" are incompatible with both. The truth hurts, get over it. Uncle Bob What errors?

Humor is alive and well in this group. Uncle Bob    http://www.newsgroups.com       The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! —–= Over 100,000 Newsgroups – Ulimited Fast Downloads – 19 Servers =—–

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Hey, After scrolling over the posts in this newsgroup over the last couple of days, and I am sure this has been going on for as long as this ng has been in existence, I see many posts that deal with ‘how wrong the Catholic Faith is". Pardon my rudeness, but, I really don’t care about the ‘errors of my faith’ based on the ‘chosen faiths of others’.  Bantering back and forth about what is and is not catholic faith is one thing, but, c’mon people…. I have no desire to ‘point out the errors of others faiths’ based on my faith.  So, do likewise…. Paula If you don’t care about the errors of your faith, then you don’t care about goodness and truth, because "errors" are incompatible with both. The truth hurts, get over it. Uncle Bob

What errors?

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Hey, After scrolling over the posts in this newsgroup over the last couple of days, and I am sure this has been going on for as long as this ng has been in existence, I see many posts that deal with ‘how wrong the Catholic Faith is". Pardon my rudeness, but, I really don’t care about the ‘errors of my faith’ based on the ‘chosen faiths of others’.  Bantering back and forth about what is and is not catholic faith is one thing, but, c’mon people…. I have no desire to ‘point out the errors of others faiths’ based on my faith.  So, do likewise…. Paula We are supposed to be witnesses to the True Faith.  The interloper trolls who try to convince us that we are wrong and they are right have to be refuted.  We have to show them the errors of their ways. Let us hearken to the words of St. James, Chap. 5:19-20:….."My brethren, if any of you shall err from the truth, and any one convert him, he must know that he who causeth a sinner to be converted from the error of his way, shall save his soul from death, and shall cover a multutude of sins." Carlque  "I never spared heretics and have always done my utmost so that the enemies of the Church should also be my enemies."  St. Jerome, 420 AD.     I’ve wondered if the idea here, in Matthew 10, is to offer but not to press the issue

Tolerance is for external conduct; it is not for the mind; the mind *cannot* tolerate error for an instant if it is sincere it its search for Truth, God’s Truth. — Ad Jesum per Mariam, Carlque  "I never spared heretics and have always done my utmost so that the enemies of the Church should also be my enemies."  St. Jerome, 420 AD. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text –      11"Whatever town or village you enter, search for some worthy person there and stay at his house until you leave. 12As you enter the home, give it your greeting. 13If the home is deserving, let your peace rest on it; if it is not, let your peace return to you. 14If anyone will not welcome you or listen to your words, shake the dust off your feet when you leave that home or town. 15I tell you the truth, it will be more bearable for Sodom and Gomorrah on the day of judgment than for that town. 16I am sending you out l ike sheep among wolves. Therefore be as shrewd as snakes and as innocent as doves. — If things were different they just would not be the same.

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Hey, After scrolling over the posts in this newsgroup over the last couple of days, and I am sure this has been going on for as long as this ng has been in existence, I see many posts that deal with ‘how wrong the Catholic Faith is". Pardon my rudeness, but, I really don’t care about the ‘errors of my faith’ based on the ‘chosen faiths of others’.  Bantering back and forth about what is and is not catholic faith is one thing, but, c’mon people…. I have no desire to ‘point out the errors of others faiths’ based on my faith.  So, do likewise…. Paula We are supposed to be witnesses to the True Faith.  The interloper trolls who try to convince us that we are wrong and they are right have to be refuted.  We have to show them the errors of their ways. Let us hearken to the words of St. James, Chap. 5:19-20:….."My brethren, if any of you shall err from the truth, and any one convert him, he must know that he who causeth a sinner to be converted from the error of his way, shall save his soul from death, and shall cover a multutude of sins." Carlque  "I never spared heretics and have always done my utmost so that the enemies of the Church should also be my enemies."  St. Jerome, 420 AD.     I’ve wondered if the idea here, in Matthew 10, is to offer but not to press the issue.      11"Whatever town or village you enter, search for some worthy person there and stay at his house until you leave. 12As you enter the home, give it your greeting. 13If the home is deserving, let your peace rest on it; if it is not, let your peace return to you. 14If anyone will not welcome you or listen to your words, shake the dust off your feet when you leave that home or town. 15I tell you the truth, it will be more bearable for Sodom and Gomorrah on the day of judgment than for that town. 16I am sending you out l ike sheep among wolves. Therefore be as shrewd as snakes and as innocent as doves. — If things were different they just would not be the same.

Response:

I doubt that the ‘freedom’ to mock, defame, belittle, or engage in excessive personal attacks would be a behavior displayed should if these same conversations were occurring in ‘real life’ and not in this forum.  I think we are all better than that.

I think the above bears repeating, as I’ve observed the same thing many times. The relative anonymity of Usenet seems to make it easier to act in ways that one normally wouldn’t face to face. I like what I read recently (perhaps in another group) about a poster saying that he tried to respond to all posts as if they were questions from his son (or other loved one), and try to respond in that context. Would that everyone took that advice. Paula

– Jeff Shirton jshirton at cogeco dot ca He didn’t sound like a baseball player…  He said things like, "Nevertheless", and "if, in fact." – Dan Quisenberry on Ted Simmons

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text –                                                     JMJ Hey, After scrolling over the posts in this newsgroup over the last couple of days, and I am sure this has been going on for as long as this ng has been in existence, I see many posts that deal with ‘how wrong the Catholic Faith is". Pardon my rudeness, but, I really don’t care about the ‘errors of my faith’ based on the ‘chosen faiths of others’. Bantering back and forth about what is and is not catholic faith is one thing, but, c’mon people…. I have no desire to ‘point out the errors of others faiths’ based on my faith.  So, do likewise…. If you don’t care about the errors of your faith, then you don’t care about goodness and truth, because "errors" are incompatible with both. The truthhurts, get over it. Define "truth" from a Christian religious standpoint?

    Didn’t Pilate ask that of Jesus? Jim Carew sfo

– If things were different they just would not be the same.

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Hey, After scrolling over the posts in this newsgroup over the last couple of days, and I am sure this has been going on for as long as this ng has been in existence, I see many posts that deal with ‘how wrong the Catholic Faith is". Pardon my rudeness, but, I really don’t care about the ‘errors of my faith’ based on the ‘chosen faiths of others’.  Bantering back and forth about what is and is not catholic faith is one thing, but, c’mon people…. I have no desire to ‘point out the errors of others faiths’ based on my faith.  So, do likewise…. Paula We are supposed to be witnesses to the True Faith.  The interloper trolls who try to convince us that we are wrong and they are right have to be refuted.  We have to show them the errors of their ways. Let us hearken to the words of St. James, Chap. 5:19-20:….."My brethren, if any of you shall err from the truth, and any one convert him, he must know that he who causeth a sinner to be converted from the error of his way, shall save his soul from death, and shall cover a multutude of sins." Carlque  "I never spared heretics and have always done my utmost so that the enemies of the Church should also be my enemies."  St. Jerome, 420 AD.

    I’ve wondered if the idea here, in Matthew 10, is to offer but not to press the issue.      11"Whatever town or village you enter, search for some worthy person there and stay at his house until you leave. 12As you enter the home, give it your greeting. 13If the home is deserving, let your peace rest on it; if it is not, let your peace return to you. 14If anyone will not welcome you or listen to your words, shake the dust off your feet when you leave that home or town. 15I tell you the truth, it will be more bearable for Sodom and Gomorrah on the day of judgment than for that town. 16I am sending you out l ike sheep among wolves. Therefore be as shrewd as snakes and as innocent as doves. — If things were different they just would not be the same.

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Hey, After scrolling over the posts in this newsgroup over the last couple of days, and I am sure this has been going on for as long as this ng has been in existence, I see many posts that deal with ‘how wrong the Catholic Faith is". Pardon my rudeness, but, I really don’t care about the ‘errors of my faith’ based on the ‘chosen faiths of others’.  Bantering back and forth about what is and is not catholic faith is one thing, but, c’mon people…. I have no desire to ‘point out the errors of others faiths’ based on my faith.  So, do likewise…. Paula

It is the stumbling block of their lives. Would they take any interest in pointing out contradictions to Muslims or Hindus? Episcopalians or Quakers? Nope. They have fallen into the trap. And as Chesterton said, "the trap is the truth". BAM

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Pardon my rudeness, but, I really don’t care about the ‘errors of my faith’ based on the ‘chosen faiths of others’. That’s a valid position, to be sure. But it just seems to me that if that’s your position, you might consider the possibility that arc.r-c isn’t the best place for you to be.  It’ll only give you, over and over and over again, what you apparently don’t want to hear. Of course, you *could* stick around, and simply "killfile" myself, and anyone else who dares to hold a position contrary to the RCC, and if you like being in a place where everyone is in agreement, and challenges to your faith never occur (which can strengthen your faith), and you only ever hear one side of an issue, then perhaps that’s a solution for you.

Jeff, there are some people in here I do enjoy reading.  I don’t ‘killfile’. And to clarify, it is not that anyone holds positions ‘contrary’ that I find annoying it is the manner in which the position is presented.  I’m speaking of ‘attitude’.  I enjoy the differences, but, the attitudes are many times out of line. There is never one side to any issue, there is never two sides to any issue, there are as many sides to an issue as there are humans involved in the issue. I have no desire to ‘point out the errors of others faiths’ based on my faith. If that’s your position, then more power to you. So, do likewise…. Sorry, Paula, but there’s a *slight* flaw in your argument. Others are not obligated to be held to *your* personal standards.

No, they are not obligated to do so, however, it would make discussion of differences much more productive and conducive to expansion of thought.  It does not take very long for any ‘contrary concept thread’ to turn into a free for all of personal attacks.  That is sooooooo dumb.  And, that is my opinion, and, no, no one is obligated to understand that.  ;-) For instance, if you go to Jehovah’s Witnesses on the streetcorner and tell them, "I have no desire to proclaim my faith to others on the streetcorner, so do likewise", not only are they under no obligation to "do likewise", but they have the *right* to continue doing so (and I say this even though I disagree theologically with JW beliefs).

I would not ‘go to a JW’ on a street corner and make such a statement.  And, I certainly understand the point you are making. This newsgroup is like a public streetcorner, Paula. If you don’t like the conversation on it, you don’t have the right to tell others to leave, or to tell others to stop talking.

I have not done either. I have read some of the most remarkable posts in here, even from those who I do not agree with.  With few exceptions, most people who post in this thread are quite remarkable.  (that is a compliment, btw).  I doubt that the ‘freedom’ to mock, defame, belittle, or engage in excessive personal attacks would be a behavior displayed should if these same conversations were occurring in ‘real life’ and not in this forum.  I think we are all better than that. You have the right to stop listening, and the right to leave *yourself*. But that’s the extent of your control.

yah… Paula

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Hey, After scrolling over the posts in this newsgroup over the last couple of days, and I am sure this has been going on for as long as this ng has been in existence, I see many posts that deal with ‘how wrong the Catholic Faith is". Pardon my rudeness, but, I really don’t care about the ‘errors of my faith’ based on the ‘chosen faiths of others’.  Bantering back and forth about what is and is not catholic faith is one thing, but, c’mon people…. I have no desire to ‘point out the errors of others faiths’ based on my faith.  So, do likewise….

IOW, you don’t care that your church teaches false doctrine? Paula

– Psalm 51:16  For thou desirest not sacrifice; else would I give it: thou delightest not in burnt offering. 17  The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit: a broken and a contrite heart, O God, thou wilt not despise.

Response:

in article – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Hey, After scrolling over the posts in this newsgroup over the last couple of days, and I am sure this has been going on for as long as this ng has been in existence, I see many posts that deal with ‘how wrong the Catholic Faith is". Pardon my rudeness, but, I really don’t care about the ‘errors of my faith’ based on the ‘chosen faiths of others’.  Bantering back and forth about what is and is not catholic faith is one thing, but, c’mon people…. I have no desire to ‘point out the errors of others faiths’ based on my faith.  So, do likewise…. IOW, you don’t care that your church teaches false doctrine?

No, I don’t care what you think my church teaches. Paula

Response:

IOW, you don’t care that your church teaches false doctrine?

I’m a Catholic, my church doesn’t teach false doctrine.

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Hey, After scrolling over the posts in this newsgroup over the last couple of days, and I am sure this has been going on for as long as this ng has been in existence, I see many posts that deal with ‘how wrong the Catholic Faith is". Pardon my rudeness, but, I really don’t care about the ‘errors of my faith’ based on the ‘chosen faiths of others’.  Bantering back and forth about what is and is not catholic faith is one thing, but, c’mon people…. I have no desire to ‘point out the errors of others faiths’ based on my faith.  So, do likewise…. IOW, you don’t care that your church teaches false doctrine?

        …like the false doctrine of "No musical instruments in church."? No, holy Church doesn’t teach that. Alan

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Hey, After scrolling over the posts in this newsgroup over the last couple of days, and I am sure this has been going on for as long as this ng has been in existence, I see many posts that deal with ‘how wrong the Catholic Faith is". Pardon my rudeness, but, I really don’t care about the ‘errors of my faith’ based on the ‘chosen faiths of others’.  Bantering back and forth about what is and is not catholic faith is one thing, but, c’mon people…. I have no desire to ‘point out the errors of others faiths’ based on my faith.  So, do likewise…. Paula If you don’t care about the errors of your faith, then you don’t care about goodness and truth, because "errors" are incompatible with both. The truth hurts, get over it. Uncle Bob er, bob, didn’t we already have the ’subjective perspective’ discussion? Thought we had straightened all of that out!  hehe. Paula

thanks for reminding me      http://www.newsfeeds.com       The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! —–= Over 100,000 Newsgroups – Ulimited Fast Downloads – 19 Servers =—–

Response:

Pardon my rudeness, but, I really don’t care about the ‘errors of my faith’ based on the ‘chosen faiths of others’.

That’s a valid position, to be sure. But it just seems to me that if that’s your position, you might consider the possibility that arc.r-c isn’t the best place for you to be.  It’ll only give you, over and over and over again, what you apparently don’t want to hear. Of course, you *could* stick around, and simply "killfile" myself, and anyone else who dares to hold a position contrary to the RCC, and if you like being in a place where everyone is in agreement, and challenges to your faith never occur (which can strengthen your faith), and you only ever hear one side of an issue, then perhaps that’s a solution for you. I have no desire to ‘point out the errors of others faiths’ based on my

faith. If that’s your position, then more power to you. So, do likewise….

Sorry, Paula, but there’s a *slight* flaw in your argument. Others are not obligated to be held to *your* personal standards. For instance, if you go to Jehovah’s Witnesses on the streetcorner and tell them, "I have no desire to proclaim my faith to others on the streetcorner, so do likewise", not only are they under no obligation to "do likewise", but they have the *right* to continue doing so (and I say this even though I disagree theologically with JW beliefs). This newsgroup is like a public streetcorner, Paula. If you don’t like the conversation on it, you don’t have the right to tell others to leave, or to tell others to stop talking. You have the right to stop listening, and the right to leave *yourself*. But that’s the extent of your control. Paula

– Jeff Shirton jshirton at cogeco dot ca He didn’t sound like a baseball player…  He said things like, "Nevertheless", and "if, in fact." – Dan Quisenberry on Ted Simmons

Response:

                                                  JMJ – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Hey, After scrolling over the posts in this newsgroup over the last couple of days, and I am sure this has been going on for as long as this ng has been in existence, I see many posts that deal with ‘how wrong the Catholic Faith is". Pardon my rudeness, but, I really don’t care about the ‘errors of my faith’ based on the ‘chosen faiths of others’. Bantering back and forth about what is and is not catholic faith is one thing, but, c’mon people…. I have no desire to ‘point out the errors of others faiths’ based on my faith.  So, do likewise…. If you don’t care about the errors of your faith, then you don’t care about goodness and truth, because "errors" are incompatible with both. The truthhurts, get over it. Define "truth" from a Christian religious standpoint? From a Catholic Christian religious standpoint, the truth is whatever the church teaches you.

Definition of "truth" from the "Catholic Dictionary" 1945 edition, Attwater p532 1. Logical, an adequation or agreement between the mind and thing 2. Ontological, or truth of a thing, the adequation between a thing and the Divine Mind(God). 3. Moral, the conformity of words or other signs with the conscience Jim Carew sfo – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -Which doesn’t address my question as posed to you which was "Define "truth" from a *Christian* religious stand point?" Nary a word in there about Catholicism Sorry Jim, you did not ask for the catholic version. In that case, I don’t now what truth is from a Christian standpoint. " To define something is to limit it"

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Hey, After scrolling over the posts in this newsgroup over the last couple of days, and I am sure this has been going on for as long as this ng has been in existence, I see many posts that deal with ‘how wrong the Catholic Faith is". Pardon my rudeness, but, I really don’t care about the ‘errors of my faith’ based on the ‘chosen faiths of others’.  Bantering back and forth about what is and is not catholic faith is one thing, but, c’mon people…. I have no desire to ‘point out the errors of others faiths’ based on my faith.  So, do likewise…. Paula If you don’t care about the errors of your faith, then you don’t care about goodness and truth, because "errors" are incompatible with both. The truth hurts, get over it. Uncle Bob

er, bob, didn’t we already have the ’subjective perspective’ discussion? Thought we had straightened all of that out!  hehe. Paula

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Hey, After scrolling over the posts in this newsgroup over the last couple of days, and I am sure this has been going on for as long as this ng has been in existence, I see many posts that deal with ‘how wrong the Catholic Faith is". Pardon my rudeness, but, I really don’t care about the ‘errors of my faith’ based on the ‘chosen faiths of others’.  Bantering back and forth about what is and is not catholic faith is one thing, but, c’mon people…. I have no desire to ‘point out the errors of others faiths’ based on my faith.  So, do likewise…. Paula

We are supposed to be witnesses to the True Faith.  The interloper trolls who try to convince us that we are wrong and they are right have to be refuted.  We have to show them the errors of their ways.  Let us hearken to the words of St. James, Chap. 5:19-20:….."My brethren, if any of you shall err from the truth, and any one convert him, he must know that he who causeth a sinner to be converted from the error of his way, shall save his soul from death, and shall cover a multutude of sins." — Ad Jesum per Mariam, Carlque  "I never spared heretics and have always done my utmost so that the enemies of the Church should also be my enemies."  St. Jerome, 420 AD. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text –

Response:

                                                  JMJ – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Hey, After scrolling over the posts in this newsgroup over the last couple of days, and I am sure this has been going on for as long as this ng has been in existence, I see many posts that deal with ‘how wrong the Catholic Faith is". Pardon my rudeness, but, I really don’t care about the ‘errors of my faith’ based on the ‘chosen faiths of others’. Bantering back and forth about what is and is not catholic faith is one thing, but, c’mon people…. I have no desire to ‘point out the errors of others faiths’ based on my faith.  So, do likewise…. If you don’t care about the errors of your faith, then you don’t care about goodness and truth, because "errors" are incompatible with both. The truthhurts, get over it.  Define "truth" from a Christian religious standpoint? From a Catholic Christian religious standpoint, the truth is whatever the church teaches you.

Which doesn’t address my question as posed to you which was "Define "truth" from a *Christian* religious stand point?" Nary a word in there about Catholicism Jim Carew sfo

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text –                                                   JMJ Hey, After scrolling over the posts in this newsgroup over the last couple of days, and I am sure this has been going on for as long as this ng has been in existence, I see many posts that deal with ‘how wrong the Catholic Faith is". Pardon my rudeness, but, I really don’t care about the ‘errors of my faith’ based on the ‘chosen faiths of others’. Bantering back and forth about what is and is not catholic faith is one thing, but, c’mon people…. I have no desire to ‘point out the errors of others faiths’ based on my faith.  So, do likewise…. If you don’t care about the errors of your faith, then you don’t care about goodness and truth, because "errors" are incompatible with both. The truthhurts, get over it.  Define "truth" from a Christian religious standpoint? From a Catholic Christian religious standpoint, the truth is whatever the church teaches you. Which doesn’t address my question as posed to you which was "Define "truth" from a *Christian* religious stand point?" Nary a word in there about Catholicism Jim Carew sfo

Sorry Jim, youdid not ask for the catholic version. In that case, I don’t now what truth is from a Christian standpoint. " To define something is to limit it" Uncle Bob    http://www.newsfeeds.com       The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! —–= Over 100,000 Newsgroups – Ulimited Fast Downloads – 19 Servers =—–

Response:

                                                    JMJ – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Hey, After scrolling over the posts in this newsgroup over the last couple of days, and I am sure this has been going on for as long as this ng has been in existence, I see many posts that deal with ‘how wrong the Catholic Faith is". Pardon my rudeness, but, I really don’t care about the ‘errors of my faith’ based on the ‘chosen faiths of others’. Bantering back and forth about what is and is not catholic faith is one thing, but, c’mon people…. I have no desire to ‘point out the errors of others faiths’ based on my faith.  So, do likewise…. If you don’t care about the errors of your faith, then you don’t care about goodness and truth, because "errors" are incompatible with both. The truthhurts, get over it.

Define "truth" from a Christian religious standpoint? Jim Carew sfo

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text –                                                     JMJ Hey, After scrolling over the posts in this newsgroup over the last couple of days, and I am sure this has been going on for as long as this ng has been in existence, I see many posts that deal with ‘how wrong the Catholic Faith is". Pardon my rudeness, but, I really don’t care about the ‘errors of my faith’ based on the ‘chosen faiths of others’. Bantering back and forth about what is and is not catholic faith is one thing, but, c’mon people…. I have no desire to ‘point out the errors of others faiths’ based on my faith.  So, do likewise…. If you don’t care about the errors of your faith, then you don’t care about goodness and truth, because "errors" are incompatible with both. The truthhurts, get over it. Define "truth" from a Christian religious standpoint?

From a Catholic Christian religious standpoint, the truth is whatever the church teaches you. "Live long and prosper" Spock Uncle Bob    http://www.newsfeeds.com       The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! —–= Over 100,000 Newsgroups – Ulimited Fast Downloads – 19 Servers =—–

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Hey, After scrolling over the posts in this newsgroup over the last couple of days, and I am sure this has been going on for as long as this ng has been in existence, I see many posts that deal with ‘how wrong the Catholic Faith is". Pardon my rudeness, but, I really don’t care about the ‘errors of my faith’ based on the ‘chosen faiths of others’.  Bantering back and forth about what is and is not catholic faith is one thing, but, c’mon people…. I have no desire to ‘point out the errors of others faiths’ based on my faith.  So, do likewise…. Paula

Response:

Hey, After scrolling over the posts in this newsgroup over the last couple of days, and I am sure this has been going on for as long as this ng has been in existence, I see many posts that deal with ‘how wrong the Catholic Faith is". Pardon my rudeness, but, I really don’t care about the ‘errors of my faith’ based on the ‘chosen faiths of others’.  Bantering back and forth about what is and is not catholic faith is one thing, but, c’mon people…. I have no desire to ‘point out the errors of others faiths’ based on my faith.  So, do likewise…. Paula

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Hey, After scrolling over the posts in this newsgroup over the last couple of days, and I am sure this has been going on for as long as this ng has been in existence, I see many posts that deal with ‘how wrong the Catholic Faith is". Pardon my rudeness, but, I really don’t care about the ‘errors of my faith’ based on the ‘chosen faiths of others’.  Bantering back and forth about what is and is not catholic faith is one thing, but, c’mon people…. I have no desire to ‘point out the errors of others faiths’ based on my faith.  So, do likewise…. Paula

If you don’t care about the errors of your faith, then you don’t care about goodness and truth, because "errors" are incompatible with both. The truth hurts, get over it. Uncle Bob    http://www.newsfeeds.com       The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! —–= Over 100,000 Newsgroups – Ulimited Fast Downloads – 19 Servers =—–

Response:

Question:

Hey, some people wonder what a catholic priest would know about marriage,

Some of them don’t become priests until after they’re married and the wife dies.  The priests can have kids from the marriage(s).  All that matters is that they are not married when they are priests.  From what I’ve heard, it doesn’t happen that often, but it does happen.

Response:

Hey, some people wonder what a catholic priest would know about marriage,

the same as any unmarried therapist.  I’m pretty sure part of the training to be a priest is counseling.  

Response:

Bruce – There is an excellent resource for starting and running self-help support groups at  http://www.selfhelpnetwork.wichita.edu/ Click on "Services and Resources" and then on "Instructional  ’How To’ Library." It’s a collection around 50 one- to eight-page articles about starting, organizing, publicizing, and maintaining a support group. Its just great. -Bill – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Howdy. I’m not divorced, but I’ve been asked to host a divorce support group in my home, starting this week. I expect 4-6 folks at the first meeting. What kind of things should we try to get done, get accomplished? What kind of things should we talk about, not talk about? What can I do, as a non-divorced guy, do to help such a meeting/group? Thanks

Response:

Janie – I got through just now by clicking on the URL below. Keep trying, I guess. -Bill

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text –  http://www.selfhelpnetwork.wichita.edu/ Click on "Services and Resources" and then on "Instructional  ’How To’ Library." It’s a collection around 50 one- to eight-page articles about starting, organizing, publicizing, and maintaining a support group. Its just great. Wow, this sounds much more functional than all those dry clinical sites I came up with on group therapy!  Seems like it might be a great resource, Bill!  (Only problem is, I get a "no server response" error when I try to go to it – could you double check and make sure you’ve given the correct URL please?) Janie — The reason why rivers and seas receive the homage of a hundred mountain streams is that they keep below them.  – Lao Tse

Response:

Howdy. I’m not divorced, but I’ve been asked to host a divorce support group in my home, starting this week. I expect 4-6 folks at the first meeting. What kind of things should we try to get done, get accomplished? What kind of things should we talk about, not talk about? What can I do, as a non-divorced guy, do to help such a meeting/group? Thanks

Response:

I think a first meeting should be to get to know each other…get each others stories…after that I think they will pretty much run the meeting. Good Luck!  I wish we had something like that in my hometown when I needed it. Daisy – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Howdy. I’m not divorced, but I’ve been asked to host a divorce support group in my home, starting this week. I expect 4-6 folks at the first meeting. What kind of things should we try to get done, get accomplished? What kind of things should we talk about, not talk about? What can I do, as a non-divorced guy, do to help such a meeting/group? Thanks

Response:

What kind of things should we try to get done, get accomplished? What kind of things should we talk about, not talk about?

Well, IMO, other than a general ‘get to know each other a bit’ thing, *I* would probably go for the ‘You *have* to take care of yourself first’ line of attack and then brainstorm a bit on the easiest ways to make sure you eat right, get enough sleep, easy steps towards getting out of or keeping away from being depressed. As far as not talk about, I wouldn’t go so far as to say there are things you shouldn’t talk about, but maybe, for a first meeting, you also might want to lay down some ground rules or discuss how the group is to be run. I can see the possibility of the group getting ‘out of control’, especially if the group is mixed between leavers and leavees, and even males and females. Tracey

Response:

Hi, Well first I think  you should get to know one another, find out where along in the Divorce process every one is or how long they have been divorced. Work form there, there are bound to be things that each person is sensitive of and might not wish to discuss.   Best  of luck with it.

Response:

Howdy. I’m not divorced, but I’ve been asked to host a divorce support group in my home, starting this week. I expect 4-6 folks at the first meeting. What kind of things should we try to get done, get accomplished? What kind of things should we talk about, not talk about? What can I do, as a non-divorced guy, do to help such a meeting/group? Do you mind sharing why you were selected to lead the group?

My question exactly!  If you don’t know what to do or talk about, why did they want you to host it, you supply free booze or something? Or did they figure that since you’re not divorced (course you don’t say if you;re single or married, either) then you must be smarter than them?

Response:

I don’t mind, but it might not make sense. I’m single, and I spend a lot of time with Souts. Several of these Scouts have divorced parents. It seems I tend to be the one people come to when they need someone to listen to. Plus, I have the biggest living room of anyone else in the area. A few weeks ago one of the single-parent moms of one of my scouts came to me and "vented" about several of the things she’s going through, said she needed some help. I recommended such a group, I called some other divorced folks I know (all with children in the home) and they were agreeable. Make sense? Not to me either. It’s the living room. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Howdy. I’m not divorced, but I’ve been asked to host a divorce support group in my home, starting this week. I expect 4-6 folks at the first meeting. What kind of things should we try to get done, get accomplished? What kind of things should we talk about, not talk about? What can I do, as a non-divorced guy, do to help such a meeting/group? Do you mind sharing why you were selected to lead the group? Janie — The reason why rivers and seas receive the homage of a hundred mountain streams is that they keep below them.  – Lao Tse

Response:

Thanks to all for your input. I appreciate your time and your understanding. Bruce – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Howdy. I’m not divorced, but I’ve been asked to host a divorce support group in my home, starting this week. I expect 4-6 folks at the first meeting. What kind of things should we try to get done, get accomplished? What kind of things should we talk about, not talk about? What can I do, as a non-divorced guy, do to help such a meeting/group? Thanks

Response:

Hey Bruce…serve some wine and cheese and I’ll be there!!  :) Daisy – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Thanks to all for your input. I appreciate your time and your understanding. Bruce Howdy. I’m not divorced, but I’ve been asked to host a divorce support group in my home, starting this week. I expect 4-6 folks at the first meeting. What kind of things should we try to get done, get accomplished? What kind of things should we talk about, not talk about? What can I do, as a non-divorced guy, do to help such a meeting/group? Thanks

Response:

Hey, some people wonder what a catholic priest would know about marriage, but, even as a non-catholic christian, I appreciate priests who focus not on what they don’t know or don’t have and focus on what they can do instead–like that priest who started Retrouvaille to save marriages.  (Or was it Marriage Savers?) Anyway both had great success from what I understand. Maybe he had no experience being married, but knowing that, he thought about all those people in his congregation who were married and had been to hell and back in their marriages, and seeing that great pool of resources and the need of so many people, he called them together and studied what made and broke marriages and developed ways to help couples in trouble save and improve their marriages. I think it’s great you’re getting involved.  If more people got involved in helping save marriages, then there would probably be fewer folks like me and others in similar situations.  Divorce hurts.  If you feel called to help save marriages, that’s great.  Even if it’s only for a season. Dan

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Hey Bruce…serve some wine and cheese and I’ll be there!!  :) Daisy Thanks to all for your input. I appreciate your time and your understanding. Bruce Howdy. I’m not divorced, but I’ve been asked to host a divorce support group in my home, starting this week. I expect 4-6 folks at the first meeting. What kind of things should we try to get done, get accomplished? What kind of things should we talk about, not talk about? What can I do, as a non-divorced guy, do to help such a meeting/group? Thanks

Response:

Question:

I can’t speak for "all", but I can certainly speak for myself. I hold beliefs which others describe as "Calvinist" because I studied the Bible, and with the guidance of the Holy Spirit learned that the true Gospel *is* predominantly "the same belief system" as Calvin taught (and the same belief system that Aquinas taught, and the same belief system that Augustine taught, and the same belief system that Paul taught, and the same belief system that Jesus taught).

Jesus Saint Paul Saint Augustine Saint Thomas Aquinas are all in Heaven right now, and all believe exactly the same things — the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. John Calvin may well be in Hell right now, since he led so many others into heresy, and many follow him into heresy — which leads to Hell — to this very day. If John Calvin is in Heaven or Purgatory, that is the very great Mercy of God in spite of the horrible things Calvin did to tear down God’s One Holy Church. Saint Teresa of Avila Saint Margaret Mary Saint Therese of Lisieux Saint Faustina Kowalska Saint Pius X and so many others, are the ones who authentically taught the same belief system that Jesus and Saint Paul and Saint Augustine and Saint Thomas Aquinas taught. Whereas Martin Luther John Calvin King Henry VIII and so many others, all renounced the pillar and bulwark of truth.

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – At our Good Friday services, a member of the parish (a friend of mine, actually) got up after the homily and "told her story."  I heard that the avant garde church in the city had a few people get up and witness. Now, I’m all for witnessing and don’t think that Catholics are that good at it;  the Prots definately got this on us.  HOWEVER, I don’t think that church, during Mass or whatever,  is the time.  People need to be able to skip this if they want to;  I think that’s what small faith communities are for.  Anybody else have this going on at their church? Nope, thank goodness.  I’d like the Catholic Church to remain as far removed from Protestantism as possible.  Anytime we incorporate some facet of Protestantism, it diminishes the Catholic Church. Are you referring to the common beliefs we share or the cultural differences particular to Protestants? Would the facet of Protestantism such as being marked with the Holy Spirit deposit guaranteeing future inheritance, being baptized by the Spirit into the Body of Christ–the Body made up of all who bear His name–would these be the facets you would object to?

Can’t speak for Pete, but no… those would be facets that are within the Catholic Church as well… – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Witnessing in a Mass, aside from being really embarassing, is disrespectful and arrogant, as the Mass is supposed to be about Christ, not some ol’ biddie bragging about her experiences. "Testimony" is not intended to be bragging or to dreg up sins of the past… it is neither to glorify the person nor the sins left behind, it is to honor in the congregation what God through Christ and the Holy Spirit has done for the individual. If the individual keeps that in perspective and doesn’t necessarily even bring up sins of the past (not in my view very appropriate to the function of giving a testimony), hearing a person’s testimony can be very encouraging and uplifting indeed. Several times in the book of Psalms, David speaks of praising God in the assembly, among the congregation of God’s people, etc. (eg. Psa 22:22) So it is not a non-biblical practice, regardless of what else may be said of the elegance or discretion of some Christians who have sought to honor the Lord in this way.

The Cathoilc Church doesn’t really seem to promote the Testimony method, but I don’t see anything wrong with it…  As I understand it, in some non-Catholic churches many times those baptized (adults at least) will give such a Testimony, describing their journey to faith.  I think that’s a wonderful idea and maybe the Church should consider incorporating it more. I was recently at a Mass where the Priest was speaking of a search for a principal for the school and how he finally let go and let God do it. Then the hired principal got up, and gave a Testimony about God working in his life, leading him to that job.  There is nothing wrong about the Church hearing about God working in people’s lives.  We have it quite regularly with religious (priests/nuns) missionaries, etc.  why not allow some of the lay people within the church speak about God’s work in their lives. Protestant, Catholic and Orthodox alike, I feel, can all benefit from each other’s practices, if we would just keep our eyes and our hearts open, we may well see the Holy Spirit moving among His people in different ways that reach us all and bring us closer to the Christ we love.

Yep…  we certainly can.  Once we put asside arrogance and self-importance (take some blinders off), we can then see God working there too.. I can’t speak to the appropriate time within the Mass service to fit personal testimony, being a non-Catholic Christian. My fiance is Catholic and I have attended several masses to this point and am still becoming familiar with it. I greatly enjoy the readings of the Scripture and the songs.

For me, I would think in/around the sermon would be an appropriate place. Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com – Still Only $9.95 – http://www.uncensored-news.com    With NINE Servers In California And Texas – The Worlds Uncensored News Source

Response:

Oh does THIS bring back protestant memories. Wednesday night… EVERY Wednesday night the testimony-a-thon. Oh how painful. Forced voyeurism with every lurid detail wrapped in a biblical exegesis. Perfect example of why individual and PRIVATE Confession exists. There is a difference between "testimony" and "confession".

Yeah… one is a Sacrament. (sorry, I couldn’t help that one… it was just this huge target) A testimony brings praise to God, and shares with others what wonderful things God has done in their lives.  While it is mostly about praising God and His goodness, it must by necessity be contrasted by what was "not great" about their lives that God improved, although great detail need not be gone into. An attitude as shown earlier in this thread of "I don’t want anything to do with anything that is Protestant-like or makes us similar to Protestants" literally smacks of prejudice and closed-mindedness.  

How about it smacks of experience and having been there/done that? Some of us believe what we believe just as strongly as you apparently believe what you believe. I don’t know if you were once Catholic, but I was once a Nazarene, son of a minister even… so it wasn’t like I was just walking along one day and <poof suddenly I was Catholic. As Angela wrote in another message in this thread, all congregations have good aspects and bad aspects, and we can all learn from each other. Perhaps the tendency to not like testimonies is simply a lack of familiarity with them. People are by nature reluctant to change, and tend to not like things they’re not used to.

Really weird. Perhaps the tendency to not like testimonies are the reasons given by the people who do not like testimonies. Maybe if you take some of us at face value, we’d be more inclined to do the same. It isn’t as if I had dropped into some protestant newsgroup to save you from going to hell or anything. Steve

Response:

Oh does THIS bring back protestant memories. Wednesday night… EVERY Wednesday night the testimony-a-thon. Oh how painful. Forced voyeurism with every lurid detail wrapped in a biblical exegesis. Perfect example of why individual and PRIVATE Confession exists.

There is a difference between "testimony" and "confession". A testimony brings praise to God, and shares with others what wonderful things God has done in their lives.  While it is mostly about praising God and His goodness, it must by necessity be contrasted by what was "not great" about their lives that God improved, although great detail need not be gone into. An attitude as shown earlier in this thread of "I don’t want anything to do with anything that is Protestant-like or makes us similar to Protestants" literally smacks of prejudice and closed-mindedness.  As Angela wrote in another message in this thread, all congregations have good aspects and bad aspects, and we can all learn from each other. Angela actually wrote a very good post, in which she cited Biblical references for praising God among the whole congregation. Perhaps the tendency to not like testimonies is simply a lack of familiarity with them. People are by nature reluctant to change, and tend to not like things they’re not used to. Steve

– Jeff Shirton jshirton at cogeco dot ca He didn’t sound like a baseball player…  He said things like, "Nevertheless", and "if, in fact." – Dan Quisenberry on Ted Simmons

Response:

You echo my sentiments about Protestantism, especially the Fundamentalist realm. It’s too much about the congregation, from the witnessing to the focus on the pastor

I’ve been to many different Protestant congregations, and what you describe above are things I’ve *never* come across. to the existence of the sect being based on some guy’s personal interpretation of what HE thinks Christianity is about.

Do you *really* think that we ride on the coattails of the faith of people like Luther, Calvin, etc.?  I’d tell you you’re wrong, but I get the feeling you’d refuse to believe me. Oh well… — Jeff Shirton jshirton at cogeco dot ca He didn’t sound like a baseball player…  He said things like, "Nevertheless", and "if, in fact." – Dan Quisenberry on Ted Simmons

Response:

to the existence of the sect being based on some guy’s personal interpretation of what HE thinks Christianity is about. Do you *really* think that we ride on the coattails of the faith of people like Luther, Calvin, etc.?  I’d tell you you’re wrong, but I get the feeling you’d refuse to believe me.

Its either Luther,Calvin, or some guy with Charisma whose dissatisfied with All that has come before him. How else do you explain: small Ecumenical Christian church committed to working openly with feminist theology, relationships among women and men, and our commitment to justice and peace. http://www.seekerschurch.org  ’Beach Cities Community Church’ http://www.beachcities.org/ Our pastor/teacher Kent Sparks founded Beachcities Community Church (BCCC) in December 1985, because he "saw the need for a church committed to Biblical values and featuring a contemporary worship style-a church to help people in the beach community get saved."

Response:

Do you *really* think that we ride on the coattails of the faith of people like Luther, Calvin, etc.?  I’d tell you you’re wrong, but I get the feeling you’d refuse to believe me. Of course Protestants do!

Actually, we don’t. But I’d be *very* careful here, if I were you.  If you refuse to be corrected about Protestants and their beliefs, and instead decide to believe whatever you want, then you *JUSTIFY* it when Protestants make accusations of "Catholics worship Mary!" and "Catholics worship the Pope!" and similarly refuse correction, just as you refuse correction here. Or am I to beleive that all Calvinists (wonder where they got that name) or Lutherans (wonder where that name comes from as well)

The names come from John Calvin and Martin Luther respectively. They don’t mean that the believers "blindly follow" them, any more than "Catholics" blindly follow Catholic teachings. The names are simply useful for succinctly describing a person’s beliefs, since there are so many different flavours of Christianity, such as Catholicism, Anglicanism, Lutheranism, etc. etc. all just happened to one day come up with the same belief system?

I can’t speak for "all", but I can certainly speak for myself. I hold beliefs which others describe as "Calvinist" because I studied the Bible, and with the guidance of the Holy Spirit learned that the true Gospel *is* predominantly "the same belief system" as Calvin taught (and the same belief system that Aquinas taught, and the same belief system that Augustine taught, and the same belief system that Paul taught, and the same belief system that Jesus taught). But like I said, you refuse to accept the truth, so: Oh well…

– Jeff Shirton jshirton at cogeco dot ca He didn’t sound like a baseball player…  He said things like, "Nevertheless", and "if, in fact." – Dan Quisenberry on Ted Simmons

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – You echo my sentiments about Protestantism, especially the Fundamentalist realm. It’s too much about the congregation, from the witnessing to the focus on the pastor I’ve been to many different Protestant congregations, and what you describe above are things I’ve *never* come across.

‘ ‘Many,’ I am guessing means somewhere between 3 and 10. to the existence of the sect being based on some guy’s personal interpretation of what HE thinks Christianity is about. Do you *really* think that we ride on the coattails of the faith of people like Luther, Calvin, etc.?  I’d tell you you’re wrong, but I get the feeling you’d refuse to believe me.

Of course Protestants do!  Or am I to beleive that all Calvinists (wonder where they got that name) or Lutherans (wonder where that name comes from as well) all just happened to one day come up with the same belief system?  No, they just follow the teachings of another man.  That’s why they are called Lutherans and Calvinists or even Russelites. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -Oh well…

Response:

Oh does THIS bring back protestant memories. Wednesday night… EVERY Wednesday night the testimony-a-thon. Oh how painful. Forced voyeurism with every lurid detail wrapped in a biblical exegesis. Perfect example of why individual and PRIVATE Confession exists. Steve You echo my sentiments about Protestantism, especially the Fundamentalist realm. It’s too much about the congregation, from the witnessing to the focus on the pastor to the existence of the sect being based on some guy’s personal interpretation of what HE thinks Christianity is about.

I always get worried when some member of the hierarchy starts talking about we can learn from protestantism… protestants have a lot to offer, protestantISM on the other hand… Actually, that’s not entirely correct, protestantism taught me to be a Catholic. Every time some element of protestantism makes another appearance at Mass, I get those old time heebie-jeebies. After all, there was a reason I left. Steve

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – At our Good Friday services, a member of the parish (a friend of mine, actually) got up after the homily and "told her story."  I heard that the avant garde church in the city had a few people get up and witness.   Now, I’m all for witnessing and don’t think that Catholics are that good at it;  the Prots definately got this on us.  HOWEVER, I don’t think that church, during Mass or whatever,  is the time.  People need to be able to skip this if they want to;  I think that’s what small faith communities are for.  Anybody else have this going on at their church? Nope, thank goodness.  I’d like the Catholic Church to remain as far removed from Protestantism as possible.  Anytime we incorporate some facet of Protestantism, it diminishes the Catholic Church. Witnessing in a Mass, aside from being really embarassing, is disrespectful and arrogant, as the Mass is supposed to be about Christ, not some ol’ biddie bragging about her experiences. Oh does THIS bring back protestant memories. Wednesday night… EVERY Wednesday night the testimony-a-thon. Oh how painful. Forced voyeurism with every lurid detail wrapped in a biblical exegesis. Perfect example of why individual and PRIVATE Confession exists. Steve

You echo my sentiments about Protestantism, especially the Fundamentalist realm. It’s too much about the congregation, from the witnessing to the focus on the pastor to the existence of the sect being based on some guy’s personal interpretation of what HE thinks Christianity is about.

Response:

At our Good Friday services, a member of the parish (a friend of mine, actually) got up after the homily and "told her story."  I heard that the avant garde church in the city had a few people get up and witness.   Now, I’m all for witnessing and don’t think that Catholics are that good at it;  the Prots definately got this on us.  HOWEVER, I don’t think that church, during Mass or whatever,  is the time.  People need to be able to skip this if they want to;  I think that’s what small faith communities are for.  Anybody else have this going on at their church?

Response:

At our Good Friday services, a member of the parish (a friend of mine, actually) got up after the homily and "told her story."  I heard that the avant garde church in the city had a few people get up and witness.   Now, I’m all for witnessing and don’t think that Catholics are that good at it;  the Prots definately got this on us.  HOWEVER, I don’t think that church, during Mass or whatever,  is the time.  People need to be able to skip this if they want to;  I think that’s what small faith communities are for.  Anybody else have this going on at their church?

I’ve never seen it.  It’s allowed outside the homily, but I think it’s supposed to be more just before the end of mass.  You can’t leave before final blessing either, of course.  Actually at San Juan Capistrano, there was a woman who told her story before final blessing.  Steve and I were angry at the priest for some comments he’d made during his homily (I don’t remember, I’m sorry) and I guess the parish was too; he vanished soon after.

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – At our Good Friday services, a member of the parish (a friend of mine, actually) got up after the homily and "told her story."  I heard that the avant garde church in the city had a few people get up and witness. Now, I’m all for witnessing and don’t think that Catholics are that good at it;  the Prots definately got this on us.  HOWEVER, I don’t think that church, during Mass or whatever,  is the time.  People need to be able to skip this if they want to;  I think that’s what small faith communities are for.  Anybody else have this going on at their church? Nope, thank goodness.  I’d like the Catholic Church to remain as far removed from Protestantism as possible.  Anytime we incorporate some facet of Protestantism, it diminishes the Catholic Church.

Are you referring to the common beliefs we share or the cultural differences particular to Protestants? Would the facet of Protestantism such as being marked with the Holy Spirit deposit guaranteeing future inheritance, being baptized by the Spirit into the Body of Christ–the Body made up of all who bear His name–would these be the facets you would object to? Witnessing in a Mass, aside from being really embarassing, is disrespectful and arrogant, as the Mass is supposed to be about Christ, not some ol’ biddie bragging about her experiences.

"Testimony" is not intended to be bragging or to dreg up sins of the past… it is neither to glorify the person nor the sins left behind, it is to honor in the congregation what God through Christ and the Holy Spirit has done for the individual. If the individual keeps that in perspective and doesn’t necessarily even bring up sins of the past (not in my view very appropriate to the function of giving a testimony), hearing a person’s testimony can be very encouraging and uplifting indeed. Several times in the book of Psalms, David speaks of praising God in the assembly, among the congregation of God’s people, etc. (eg. Psa 22:22) So it is not a non-biblical practice, regardless of what else may be said of the elegance or discretion of some Christians who have sought to honor the Lord in this way. Protestant, Catholic and Orthodox alike, I feel, can all benefit from each other’s practices, if we would just keep our eyes and our hearts open, we may well see the Holy Spirit moving among His people in different ways that reach us all and bring us closer to the Christ we love. I can’t speak to the appropriate time within the Mass service to fit personal testimony, being a non-Catholic Christian. My fiance is Catholic and I have attended several masses to this point and am still becoming familiar with it. I greatly enjoy the readings of the Scripture and the songs. Angela

Response:

At our Good Friday services, a member of the parish (a friend of mine, actually) got up after the homily and "told her story."  I heard that the avant garde church in the city had a few people get up and witness.   Now, I’m all for witnessing and don’t think that Catholics are that good at it;  the Prots definately got this on us.  HOWEVER, I don’t think that church, during Mass or whatever,  is the time.  People need to be able to skip this if they want to;  I think that’s what small faith communities are for.  Anybody else have this going on at their church?

Nope, thank goodness.  I’d like the Catholic Church to remain as far removed from Protestantism as possible.  Anytime we incorporate some facet of Protestantism, it diminishes the Catholic Church. Witnessing in a Mass, aside from being really embarassing, is disrespectful and arrogant, as the Mass is supposed to be about Christ, not some ol’ biddie bragging about her experiences.

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – At our Good Friday services, a member of the parish (a friend of mine, actually) got up after the homily and "told her story."  I heard that the avant garde church in the city had a few people get up and witness.   Now, I’m all for witnessing and don’t think that Catholics are that good at it;  the Prots definately got this on us.  HOWEVER, I don’t think that church, during Mass or whatever,  is the time.  People need to be able to skip this if they want to;  I think that’s what small faith communities are for.  Anybody else have this going on at their church? Nope, thank goodness.  I’d like the Catholic Church to remain as far removed from Protestantism as possible.  Anytime we incorporate some facet of Protestantism, it diminishes the Catholic Church. Witnessing in a Mass, aside from being really embarassing, is disrespectful and arrogant, as the Mass is supposed to be about Christ, not some ol’ biddie bragging about her experiences.

Oh does THIS bring back protestant memories. Wednesday night… EVERY Wednesday night the testimony-a-thon. Oh how painful. Forced voyeurism with every lurid detail wrapped in a biblical exegesis. Perfect example of why individual and PRIVATE Confession exists. Steve

Response:

Question:

<snip : : It is the height of illogic to blame a belief system for the actions of : those who break it’s rules. Sincerity and fervent zeal in a belief system without foundational truths is blatant heresy.  Because you believe in something, does not necessarily make that thing true; especially so, if your faith is from man, instead of God. Re. Religiosity leading to a counterfeit Christianity.

Which of course is a complete non-sequitor: what in the world did what you just wrote have to do with what I did?

Response:

A nice post…all the same complacency and emotions should not replace common sense. Lest we not forgot those that were complaisant concerning early reports of child sex abuse which enabled offenders to re-offend time and time again.

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – If a non Christian might make a point here Here are the words of another Catholic "Lord, make me an instrument of Your peace. Where there is hatred, let me sow love. Where there is injury, let me sow pardon, Where there is doubt, let me sow faith, Where there is error, let me sow truth, Where there is despair, let me sow hope, Where there is darkness, let me sow light, and where there is sadness, let me sow joy. O Divine Master, grant that I may not so much seek to be consoled, as to console; To be understood,as to understand; To be loved,as to love; For it is in giving that we receive; It is in pardoning that we are pardoned; And it is in dying that we are born to eternal life." – St. Francis of Assisi A couple of years ago I dropped by Assisi and paid Francis a visit. In his Basilica my son put a coin in the slot of the electric candelabra and the candle didn’t come on – so he thumped it as if it were a pin table and the candle lit. Nobody was upset – and I am sure of Old Francis were still around after all these centuries he’d have had a chuckle over it. Be nice! Phar Lap

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Sorry, I thought you were trying to get him to see how illogical he sounds. ;o) Why do you think the UN has condemned the Catholic policy on condoms and stated that the CC is aiding and abetting the Aids epidemic in Africa. a re-post: And you can google and see yourself blown out of the water all over again Peter. You are boring Peter, the same posts over and over and over.

Facts don’t change mate?

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Sorry, I thought you were trying to get him to see how illogical he sounds. ;o) Why do you think the UN has condemned the Catholic policy on condoms and stated that the CC is aiding and abetting the Aids epidemic in Africa. a re-post: And you can google and see yourself blown out of the water all over again Peter. You are boring Peter, the same posts over and over and over. Facts don’t change mate?