Catholics & Catholicism » Roman Catholic Cathedral

to kansan1225

admin — Thu, 26 Feb 2004 00:00:00 +0000

Question:

Hi. Please explain why you keep posting about Heidi Klum to a catholic newsgroup, and you refer to her as our lady and such. What’s up with this? Are you just being weird or did Heidi Klum become a devout Catholic or what? -Rogue

Response:

Rogue wrote in alt.religion.christian.roman-catholic: Hi. Please explain why you keep posting about Heidi Klum to a catholic newsgroup, and you refer to her as our lady and such. What’s up with this? Are you just being weird or did Heidi Klum become a devout Catholic or what? -Rogue

Hello, Rogue. The word "catholic" means "universal" in Greek and I call Ms. Klum "Our Lady" because of her universal ("catholic") and eternal significance. I post to many other Newsgroups, as well, including alt.atheism, alt.religion.christian.eastern-orthodox, alt.gossip.celebrities, misc.activism.militia, etc., because Ms. Klum’s life and career can show to everyone God’s workings in the present day. I think that Ms. Klum is Lutheran, because as a teenager she used to attend various youth functions at the Gnadenkirche (Church of Mercies) in her hometown Bergisch Gladbach, Germany, near Cologne. Her father Guenther was confirmed at this Lutheran Church and Heidi was born in the Evangelical (i.e., Lutheran) Hospital of Bergisch Gladbach. She goes back to that Church on different occasions, including the signing of a car for a Unesco charity in October 2002: http://www.gnadenkirche-gl.de/heidis_besuch1.htm The public relations representative for that Church, Ms. Ute Glaser, a free-lance journalist, also writes many of Heidi’s publicity articles in Germany. Heidi’s jewelry collection for Mouawad is based on a four-leaf clover Cross design that she had seen in the Duomo, the Cathedral of Milan, Italy, as can be seen in this photograph: http://www.heidiklum.com/news/default.htm

Response:

*plonk* NickKaffes schrieb: – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Rogue wrote in alt.religion.christian.roman-catholic: Hi. Please explain why you keep posting about Heidi Klum to a catholic newsgroup, and you refer to her as our lady and such. What’s up with this? Are you just being weird or did Heidi Klum become a devout Catholic or what? -Rogue Hello, Rogue. The word "catholic" means "universal" in Greek and I call Ms. Klum "Our Lady" because of her universal ("catholic") and eternal significance. I post to many other Newsgroups, as well, including alt.atheism, alt.religion.christian.eastern-orthodox, alt.gossip.celebrities, misc.activism.militia, etc., because Ms. Klum’s life and career can show to everyone God’s workings in the present day. I think that Ms. Klum is Lutheran, because as a teenager she used to attend various youth functions at the Gnadenkirche (Church of Mercies) in her hometown Bergisch Gladbach, Germany, near Cologne. Her father Guenther was confirmed at this Lutheran Church and Heidi was born in the Evangelical (i.e., Lutheran) Hospital of Bergisch Gladbach. She goes back to that Church on different occasions, including the signing of a car for a Unesco charity in October 2002: http://www.gnadenkirche-gl.de/heidis_besuch1.htm The public relations representative for that Church, Ms. Ute Glaser, a free-lance journalist, also writes many of Heidi’s publicity articles in Germany. Heidi’s jewelry collection for Mouawad is based on a four-leaf clover Cross design that she had seen in the Duomo, the Cathedral of Milan, Italy, as can be seen in this photograph: http://www.heidiklum.com/news/default.htm

Response:

K.u.K. Heidi Klum

admin — Mon, 27 Oct 2003 00:00:00 +0000

Question:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – R.L. Measures wrote in alt.religion.christian.roman-catholic: € what is the connection of this with Roman Catholicism? All Hallows Eve, Halloween, is a Christian holy day. Archangel Heidi is a Messenger from God. … … …

– Should ArchBishop Pell (Cardinal elect) Surrender His Passport pending Legal Hearings?

admin — Sat, 11 Oct 2003 00:00:00 +0000

Question:

I’m just putting the finishing touches on some correspondence to made to the Victorian Equal Opportunity & Human Rights Commission under the auspices of Section 160(c) of the Equal Opportunity Act of 1995, which provides the provision by which it ‘may sue and be sued in its corporate name.’ Under Section 163-168 of this same Act, the Governor in Council is established as the responsible authority for the appointment and removal of office holders within the Victorian Equal Opportunity & Human Rights Commission. Consequently, a copy of the correspondence as letter of complaint and demand, is anticipated to be directed to his office so that a decision can be made, as to whether the responsible member of the Commission is suspended from office, pending a resolution to the matter. Specifically, the impetus for a claim being made against the Equal Opportunity & Human Rights Commission, is lack of adequate attention given to complaint and the continued sanctioning of religious values based impugnity against the autonomous, religious and political rights of the individual as attribution of: 1) Gender, 2) Sexuality, 3) Employment, 4) Sovereignty (ie. As the issues addressed by the four Nuremberg Laws as Adolf ‘3rd Reich religious revivalist, as Institutional usage made of Roman Catholic Hermetic/Gnostic/Chaldean hymeneal values based occult mysticism) That were given animus by Roman Catholic Archbishop (Cardinal-elect) George Pell during celebration of Mass at Saint Patricks Cathedral in Melbourne which I attended within [the] years 1998 and 2000, in what the church has erroneously claimed {ie. as fatalistic theological error in Torah 7th day Sabbath based Jubilee chronology and Christology} as Jubilee2000. Whether [given the] civil the treasonable nature of the legal claim of human, religious and Constitutional Rights being made against Archbishop (Cardinal-elect) George Pell os the State of Rome, whether he ought to volunatarily surrender his passport in the circumstances–if not, have it removed until the legal matter against him can be heard. – Qolon –

Response:

What the FUCK are you ranting about, shit for brains?

Response:

You are religiously vitrifying me. I intend to take my complaint to every company listed in the phone book. -Barry Web page: http://members.optusnet.com.au/~barry.og Atheist, radio scanner, LIPD information. Voicemail/fax number +14136227640

Response:

Ha Ha Ha Good one Barry. That really is funny – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I intend to take my complaint to every company listed in the phone book. -Barry Web page: http://members.optusnet.com.au/~barry.og Atheist, radio scanner, LIPD information. Voicemail/fax number +14136227640

Response:

What the FUCK are you ranting about, shit for brains?

He posted the same thing twice so you would understand. Quolon, whose real name is Dolf Boek, has AIDS induced dementia. Proof of that is the fact that he has been interred in a mental asylum. -Barry Web page: http://members.optusnet.com.au/~barry.og Atheist, radio scanner, LIPD information. Voicemail/fax number +14136227640

Response:

I’m just putting the finishing touches on some correspondence to made to the Victorian Equal Opportunity & Human Rights Commission under the auspices of Section 160(c) of the Equal Opportunity Act of 1995, which provides the provision by which it ‘may sue and be sued in its corporate name.’ Under Section 163-168 of this same Act, the Governor in Council is established as the responsible authority for the appointment and removal of office holders within the Victorian Equal Opportunity & Human Rights Commission. Consequently, a copy of the correspondence as letter of complaint and demand, is anticipated to be directed to his office so that a decision can be made, as to whether the responsible member of the Commission is suspended from office, pending a resolution to the matter. Specifically, the impetus for a claim being made against the Equal Opportunity & Human Rights Commission, is lack of adequate attention given to complaint and the continued sanctioning of religious values based impugnity against the autonomous, religious and political rights of the individual as attribution of: 1) Gender, 2) Sexuality, 3) Employment, 4) Sovereignty (ie. As the issues addressed by the four Nuremberg Laws as Adolf ‘3rd Reich religious revivalist, as Institutional usage made of Roman Catholic Hermetic/Gnostic/Chaldean hymeneal values based occult mysticism) That were given animus by Roman Catholic Archbishop (Cardinal-elect) George Pell during celebration of Mass at Saint Patricks Cathedral in Melbourne which I attended within in years 1998 and 2000, in what the church has erroneously claimed {ie. as fatalistic theological error in Torah 7th day Sabbath based Jubilee chronology and Christology} as Jubilee2000. Whether civil the treasonable nature of the legal claim of human, religious and Constitutional Rights being made against Archbishop (Cardinal-elect) George Pell os the State of Rome, whether he ought to volunatarily surrender his passport in the circumstances–if not, have it removed until the legal matter against him can be heard. – Qolon –

Response:

Sisters of no mercy

admin — Mon, 14 Apr 2003 00:00:00 +0000

Question:

HOw did you get from New York to Montana?

+ I didn’t. + I was born in Great Falls, Montana. + Columbus Hospital, Sept 11th. + I lived in Great Falls until 1969. Then I lived in Illinois, Montana, South East Asia (several bases), Illinois, Germany, Spain, Turkey, Ohio, N Carolina, Saudi for a few months, Singapore and Ohio. + Did I mention New York? + Nope, I didn’t. + St Thomas was horrible. It sucked. Why? Because there were no parents that would hold you, love you, read to you, play with you. It was dark and dingy because it was an OLD building built 120 years ago with small windows, small rooms. It was built before unions changed the face of the New York Garment district. Nuns do not act like parents. Nuns pray a lot. Kids play. Of course there would be some disagreement as to what would win out. St Thomas Orphanage taught kids to work hard, pray, be quiet, study, be quiet, pray, and accept things as they were. They had no television, play stations, computers. There weren’t any play stations nor computers in the early 1950’s when you would have been attending there.

+ That is right, dave. + This is why it is unfair and stupid to talk bad about orphanages 50 years ago.

Response:

…

raising an eyebrow….

admin — Sat, 15 Sep 2001 00:00:00 +0000

Question:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Also something unrelated but of interest (to me at least): Blue is prescribed in some dioceses of Spain for the Mass of the Immaculate Conception. Blue is not a liturgical color. That is improvisation on their part. I’ve seen blue vestments on January 1 in Diocese of Arlington. I’ve seen them used in place of purple during Advent. But that didn’t make it right. But I guess the bishops are the ones to decide. Hzzz, using blue instead of purple during Advent is pushing things IMHO. I mean, blue for a Marian feast makes sense. But during Advent or Lent? Uh-uh. January 1 was being celebrated as a Marian feast, hence the blue.

I assume people are not sitting there during the Masses wondering if the priest is wearing the right colour or not? Seems very distracting from why people are meant to be at mass. — Alan Ferris eligo, ergo sum Atheist #1211 EAC(UK)#252 Ironic Torture Div. When the only colour is black – the only sound the broken bell THEN talk to me about why. Spike Milligan www.arcerland.com ICQ UIN: 12811297

Response:

Blue is not a liturgical color. That is improvisation on their part. Blue isn’t a liturgical color in the US or Canada. However, considering that the GIRM says "The conference of bishops may choose and propose to the Apostolic See adaptations suited to the needs and culture of the peoples", it might very well be approved as a liturgical color in Spain. Suzanne

ok, I stand corrected again!

Response:

Hzzz, using blue instead of purple during Advent is pushing things IMHO. I mean, blue for a Marian feast makes sense. But during Advent or Lent? Uh-uh. January 1 was being celebrated as a Marian feast, hence the blue.

Response:

Also something unrelated but of interest (to me at least): Blue is prescribed in some dioceses of Spain for the Mass of the Immaculate Conception. Blue is not a liturgical color. That is improvisation on their part. I’ve seen blue vestments on January 1 in Diocese of Arlington.

I’ve seen them used in place of purple during Advent. But that didn’t make it right. But I guess the bishops are the ones to decide.

Response:

I have often seen blue *on* vestments, particularly for Marian feasts, but the vestments were primarily white.

Response:

I’ve seen blue vestments on January 1 in Diocese of Arlington.

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – According to the rubrics, there are 9 different reasons why black may not be used at a funeral Mass. One of them pertains to the Mass being held on a feast of a double rite (except by special indult). September 15th is The Feast of the Seven Dolors of the Blessed Virgin Mary, where white vestments would normally be worn. The feast is classified as a Double of the Second Class. So….someone please tell me why the priest was wearing purple vestments? Purple is the color of sorrow. It’s also NEVER used for funerals anymore. White is used for funerals. BTW, the Church no longer uses black vestments at all. I was at a funeral at St. Agnes church (which belongs to the archdiocese of Minneapolis/St. Paul) in July and the priest wore black. If the Church doesn’t use black anymore, why were they? It is liturgically incorrect. From http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04134a.htm Black is used in offices for the dead, and on Good Friday. Also something unrelated but of interest (to me at least): Blue is prescribed in some dioceses of Spain for the Mass of the Immaculate Conception. Blue is not a liturgical color. That is improvisation on their part.

Blue isn’t a liturgical color in the US or Canada. However, considering that the GIRM says "The conference of bishops may choose and propose to the Apostolic See adaptations suited to the needs and culture of the peoples", it might very well be approved as a liturgical color in Spain. Suzanne

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Black is used in offices for the dead, and on Good Friday. That Catholic Encyclopedia is from before Vatican II. Black is liturgically incorrect. Not according to the 1975 GIRM, although we use white in my parish. So it would seem, since the GIRM is authoritative. Nonetheless, I’ve never seen black vestments in any church vestry and the vestment factory downtown doesn’t even make them. (I took my friend Fr. Clement down there to buy some vestments once.) Just because I’m curious, I’ll see what the most recent rule on the colour black is. No matter what, purple isn’t acceptable for a funeral though. According to GIRM 308d "Violet is used in Lent and Advent. It may also be worn in offices and Masses for the dead." 308e "Black may be used in Masses for the dead." I haven’t seen black vestments lately but then I rarely deal with vestments. I’m in and out of the sacristy 5-6 times a day so I’ll check the cupboard tomorrow and then I’ll ask Father.

Nope, no black vestment. My Liturgical Calendar (Ordo) from the CCCB has this to say on vestment color at funerals: "Masses for the dead celebrated in white vestments show more clearly the paschal victory that Christians gain over death." That’s all it says, so I guess it’s up to the priest to decide what he wears, in view of the GIRM’s indication that violet and black are allowed. Suzanne

Response:

That Catholic Encyclopedia is from before Vatican II. Black is liturgically incorrect.

Response:

Thank you Suzanne. I stand corrected. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – CNN is showing the funeral mass of Barbara Olsen from the Arlington, Virginia cathedral. Someone tell me why the priest is wearing purple vestments? Stephanie, According to the rubrics, there are 9 different reasons why black may not be used at a funeral Mass. One of them pertains to the Mass being held on a feast of a double rite (except by special indult). September 15th is The Feast of the Seven Dolors of the Blessed Virgin Mary, where white vestments would normally be worn. The feast is classified as a Double of the Second Class. So….someone please tell me why the priest was wearing purple vestments? BTW, the Church no longer uses black vestments at all. Black is still a liturgical color for funerals. Most of the time it is not used, but I don’t think it has been retired as a liturgical color. I don’t have any idea why they used purple outside of the Holy Seasons of Lent and Advent — that isn’t proper. That’s not what the GIRM says. http://www.christusrex.org/www1/mcitl/girmch6.html "308. Traditional usage should be retained for the vestment colors. a. White is used in the offices and Masses of the Easter and Christmas seasons; on feasts and memorials of the Lord, other than of his passion; on feasts and memorials of Mary, the angels, saints who were not martyrs, All Saints (1 November), John the Baptist (24 June), John the Evangelist (27 December), the Chair of St. Peter (22 February), and the Conversion of St. Paul (25 January). b. Red is used on Passion Sunday (Palm Sunday) and Good Friday, Pentecost, celebrations of the Lord’s passion, birthday feasts of the apostles and evangelists, and celebrations of martyrs. c. Green is used in the offices and Masses of Ordinary Time. d. Violet is used in Lent and Advent. It may also be worn in offices and Masses for the dead. e. Black may be used in Masses for the dead. f. Rose may be used on

Response:

Blue is not a liturgical color. That is improvisation on their part.

Response:

According to GIRM 308d "Violet is used in Lent and Advent. It may also be worn in offices and Masses for the dead." 308e "Black may be used in Masses for the dead." I haven’t seen black vestments lately but then I rarely deal with vestments. I’m in and out of the sacristy 5-6 times a day so I’ll check the cupboard tomorrow and then I’ll ask Father. According to a website I came across, black has been gradually phased out since Vatican II. It doesn’t mean it’s liturgically incorrect, unless there has been a decree by the CCCB or the NCCB to that effect. I was looking at the decrees Friday and I didn’t see one on vestments…but then I was looking for was the proper way to register an adopted child who’d already been baptized. Suzanne

Response:

It is liturgically incorrect. From http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04134a.htm Black is used in offices for the dead, and on Good Friday. That Catholic Encyclopedia is from before Vatican II. Black is liturgically incorrect.

Whoops…sure is. Thanks.

Response:

Black is used in offices for the dead, and on Good Friday. That Catholic Encyclopedia is from before Vatican II. Black is liturgically incorrect. Not according to the 1975 GIRM, although we use white in my parish.

So it would seem, since the GIRM is authoritative. Nonetheless, I’ve never seen black vestments in any church vestry and the vestment factory downtown doesn’t even make them. (I took my friend Fr. Clement down there to buy some vestments once.) Just because I’m curious, I’ll see what the most recent rule on the colour black is. No matter what, purple isn’t acceptable for a funeral though.

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – According to the rubrics, there are 9 different reasons why black may not be used at a funeral Mass. One of them pertains to the Mass being held on a feast of a double rite (except by special indult). September 15th is The Feast of the Seven Dolors of the Blessed Virgin Mary, where white vestments would normally be worn. The feast is classified as a Double of the Second Class. So….someone please tell me why the priest was wearing purple vestments? Purple is the color of sorrow. It’s also NEVER used for funerals anymore. White is used for funerals. BTW, the Church no longer uses black vestments at all. I was at a funeral at St. Agnes church (which belongs to the archdiocese of Minneapolis/St. Paul) in July and the priest wore black. If the Church doesn’t use black anymore, why were they? It is liturgically incorrect. From http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04134a.htm Black is used in offices for the dead, and on Good Friday. That Catholic Encyclopedia is from before Vatican II. Black is liturgically incorrect.

Not according to the 1975 GIRM, although we use white in my parish. Suzanne

Response:

From http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04134a.htm Black is used in offices for the dead, and on Good Friday. Also something unrelated but of interest (to me at least): Blue is prescribed in some dioceses of Spain for the Mass of the Immaculate Conception.

Response:

It’s also NEVER used for funerals anymore. White is used for funerals. BTW, the Church no longer uses black vestments at all. I was at a funeral at St. Agnes church (which belongs to the archdiocese of Minneapolis/St. Paul) in July and the priest wore black. If the Church doesn’t use black anymore, why were they?

It is liturgically incorrect.

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – CNN is showing the funeral mass of Barbara Olsen from the Arlington, Virginia cathedral. Someone tell me why the priest is wearing purple vestments? Stephanie, According to the rubrics, there are 9 different reasons why black may not be used at a funeral Mass. One of them pertains to the Mass being held on a feast of a double rite (except by special indult). September 15th is The Feast of the Seven Dolors of the Blessed Virgin Mary, where white vestments would normally be worn. The feast is classified as a Double of the Second Class. So….someone please tell me why the priest was wearing purple vestments? BTW, the Church no longer uses black vestments at all.

Black is still a liturgical color for funerals. Most of the time it is not used, but I don’t think it has been retired as a liturgical color. I don’t have any idea why they used purple outside of the Holy Seasons of Lent and Advent — that isn’t proper.

Response:

That’s not what the GIRM says. http://www.christusrex.org/www1/mcitl/girmch6.html "308. Traditional usage should be retained for the vestment colors. a. White is used in the offices and Masses of the Easter and Christmas seasons; on feasts and memorials of the Lord, other than of his passion; on feasts and memorials of Mary, the angels, saints who were not martyrs, All Saints (1 November), John the Baptist (24 June), John the Evangelist (27 December), the Chair of St. Peter (22 February), and the Conversion of St. Paul (25 January). b. Red is used on Passion Sunday (Palm Sunday) and Good Friday, Pentecost, celebrations of the Lord’s passion, birthday feasts of the apostles and evangelists, and celebrations of martyrs. c. Green is used in the offices and Masses of Ordinary Time. d. Violet is used in Lent and Advent. It may also be worn in offices and Masses for the dead. e. Black may be used in Masses for the dead. f. Rose may be used on

Response:

Purple is the color of sorrow. BTW, the Church no longer uses black vestments at all.

I was at a funeral at St. Agnes church (which belongs to the archdiocese of Minneapolis/St. Paul) in July and the priest wore black. If the Church doesn’t use black anymore, why were they? Steve

Response:

CNN is showing the funeral mass of Barbara Olsen from the Arlington, Virginia cathedral. Someone tell me why the priest is wearing purple vestments?

Response:

Readers of alt.religion.christian.roman-catholic, hearken unto the words of Stephanie Rendino: CNN is showing the funeral mass of Barbara Olsen from the Arlington, Virginia cathedral. Someone tell me why the priest is wearing purple vestments?

That’s a good question, I thought the Arlington Diocese was fairly conservative. I wouldn’t expect them to make a vestment goof like that. (If indeed it is a goof.) —

BTW

admin — Fri, 14 Sep 2001 00:00:00 +0000

Question:

I have to go to confession as the Ce Ce has angered me. Crossbearer

Good. You need to confess your hatred. And it’s CeCe. One word, two syllables. I’m sorry that’s too much for you to handle. I am also sorry that you feel nothing for the victims of this tragedy. God’s vengeance will come down on you for your apathy towards your fellow humans. CeCe — I do not feel obligated to believe that the same God who has endowed us with sense, reason, and intellect has intended us to forego their use. –Galileo Galilei

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I guess I’m not either, then, Bruce. Billy Graham may not play for our team, but what’s wrong with taking comfort from the words of another Christian when his words are wise? Then maybe we can become "youse guys" :0) I don’t think that religious jingoism is a part of any healthy spiritual life. So I guess we’re in the "youse guys" boat. Wow, jingoism! Big word. I had to look it up. I believe patriotism and Christianity go hand in hand. I see no problem with it. At my K of C meetings, we have both the American and the Papal flags displayed.

Patriotism does not equal jingoism. Jingoism is where your patriotism automatically includes having to bash other peoples’ countries. Religious jingoism is having to bash other peoples’ religions in order to feel good about your own, a sad commentary on one’s faith indeed.

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – "CeCe" wrote … I suppose a lot of you heard Billy Graham’s sermon from the National Cathedral in Washington D.C. I really, really liked it. Nope, I’m not protestant. So that means you can’t listen to the words anyone who is a protestant? What about Jews? Can you listen to their words? Christ was a Jew. Guess you don’t listen to him either. It is your type of bigotry and hatred that led to these unspeakable acts of terror. When are you people ever going to get it? + Sometimes we already know what they will say. + Sometimes we don’t agree with them politically. + It doesn’t mean we become: "YOU PEOPLE…" I like Billy Graham. Does that mean I’m not one of the "you people"? I guess I’m not either, then, Bruce. Billy Graham may not play for our team, but what’s wrong with taking comfort from the words of another Christian when his words are wise?

That is your choice. My choice is all he has to offer is less than the full truth. I’ll listen to the Holy Father, the Vicar of Christ. As for being you or youse people, I am neither. St. Paul says that we do not know why things happen; however, God Does. There is a reason and God knows the reason. It is for us to trust in God; therefore, I am not upset, confused , in shock or any other psychobabble being offered. I have the Mass and Christ to console me. I have to go to confession as the Ce Ce has angered me. Crossbearer

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Howdy CeCe !! I can think of three possible reasons you have come to this newsgroup. 1 – you are nobly attempting to show us the error of our Catholic ways so that we can be TRULY saved. We welcome this type of discussion if it is a civil one. 2 – you want to learn more before you convert to Catholicism. Yeah !!! 3 – you are trying to pick fights with us because you disagree with us. It is obvious that you are only interested in picking fights. With your departure from this ng, you will take your hate with you. Isn’t there an anti-Cath ng out there where you can find friends? I hereby invite you to leave. alt.religion.christian.roman-catholic michel

Howdy you fucking asshole. I am a catholic you idiot. Cradle catholic at that. Born and raised, 12 years of catholic school, go to Mass every Sunday and receive the Eucharist too. So shove you invitation up your bigoted ass. CeCe — I do not feel obligated to believe that the same God who has endowed us with sense, reason, and intellect has intended us to forego their use. –Galileo Galilei

Response:

Dear CeCe: I know you hate being attacked for what you believe and many have been doing this to you over the past several months, with reasons that disturb me greatly. When I read a few of your comments and see you using the word "fornication under the court of the king," I ask myself what do you want to gain from this? You know how I feel about you CeCe, and I just don’t think this does anything for your cause. We all get angry on this group and it saddens me deeply. Instead of this being a place for us to share what we feel and what we truly believe, and our great love for God, it has become a place to bash each other verbally. I pray that someday folks will wake up, look around at what’s happening in our Country and the world, and hopefully one day rid the world of hatred and replace it with love. Monica "Our greatest vision comes from our heart. It allows us to see everything, even if we are blind."

Response:

I suppose a lot of you heard Billy Graham’s sermon from the National Cathedral in Washington D.C. I really, really liked it. Nope, I’m not protestant.

John said to him, "Teacher, we saw a man casting out demons in your name, and we forbade him, because he was not following us." But Jesus said, "Do not forbid him; for no one who does a mighty work in my name will be able soon after to speak evil of me. For he that is not against us is for us." Mark 9:38ff I also caught it last night on a replay: very good. — The old religionists tortured men physically for a moral truth. The new realists torture men morally for a physical truth. Gilbert Keith Chesterton

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Howdy CeCe !! I can think of three possible reasons you have come to this newsgroup. 1 – you are nobly attempting to show us the error of our Catholic ways so that we can be TRULY saved. We welcome this type of discussion if it is a civil one. 2 – you want to learn more before you convert to Catholicism. Yeah !!! 3 – you are trying to pick fights with us because you disagree with us. It is obvious that you are only interested in picking fights. With your departure from this ng, you will take your hate with you. Isn’t there an anti-Cath ng out there where you can find friends? I hereby invite you to leave. alt.religion.christian.roman-catholic michel Howdy you fucking asshole. I am a catholic you idiot. Cradle catholic at that. Born and raised, 12 years of catholic school, go to Mass every Sunday and receive the Eucharist too. So shove you invitation up your bigoted ass. CeCe

So sweet, so sensitive. The kind of woman you want to bring home to your parents…**sssiiiggghhh**….. Bruce

Response:

"Bruce LaMore" wrote I like Billy Graham. Does that mean I’m not one of the "you people"? + Uh oh…. + A Catholic who likes Billy Graham….. + I’m not sure you can belong to the same "you people" club. + Of course you are always welcome in the "alan ferrit liars club." + Lots of members. Don’t forget next Thursday is Pot Luck night. SL is bring ribs. Will will bring the salad, I’ve got desert, and you bring the Lone Star Long Necks.

I prefer Saint Arnold’s beer. www.saintarnold.com Made by some good Catholic boys in Houston. Now would be the time for Octoberfest… Bruce — Beer is proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy. –Benjamin Franklin

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I suppose a lot of you heard Billy Graham’s sermon from the National Cathedral in Washington D.C. I really, really liked it. Nope, I’m not protestant. So that means you can’t listen to the words anyone who is a protestant? What about Jews? Can you listen to their words? Christ was a Jew. Guess you don’t listen to him either. It is your type of bigotry and hatred that led to these unspeakable acts of terror. When are you people ever going to get it? CeCe Who holds the full truth? Why listen to half truths? As Christ told his Apostles, let them be! As for a being a bigot, your action exposes you for what you are!

You are calling me a bigot? Ha! You won’t even listen to the words of Christ, who was a Jew. People like you are dangerous religious zealots. You are no better than the terrorists. Remember, they believe they are right too. You are a jackass and will burn in hell for your bigotry and hatred. CeCe — I do not feel obligated to believe that the same God who has endowed us with sense, reason, and intellect has intended us to forego their use. –Galileo Galilei

Response:

I guess I’m not either, then, Bruce. Billy Graham may not play for our team, but what’s wrong with taking comfort from the words of another Christian when his words are wise? Then maybe we can become "youse guys" :0) I don’t think that religious jingoism is a part of any healthy spiritual life. So I guess we’re in the "youse guys" boat.

Wow, jingoism! Big word. I had to look it up. I believe patriotism and Christianity go hand in hand. I see no problem with it. At my K of C meetings, we have both the American and the Papal flags displayed. — Bruce "Soli Deo gloria"

Response:

I don’t think that religious jingoism is a part of any healthy spiritual life. So I guess we’re in the "youse guys" boat.

Response:

"Bruce LaMore" wrote I like Billy Graham. Does that mean I’m not one of the "you people"?

+ Uh oh…. + A Catholic who likes Billy Graham….. + I’m not sure you can belong to the same "you people" club. + Of course you are always welcome in the "alan ferrit liars club." + Lots of members. Don’t forget next Thursday is Pot Luck night. SL is bring ribs. Will will bring the salad, I’ve got desert, and you bring the Lone Star Long Necks.

Response:

"Michel Cazayoux" wrote … Howdy CeCe !! I can think of three possible reasons you have come to this newsgroup. 3 – you are trying to pick fights with us because you disagree with us. It is obvious that you are only interested in picking fights. I hereby invite you to leave.

+ Excellent observation, Michel…. + Looks like Michel will soon be invited into another club: The cece "plonk" club. This club is really starting to grow fast.

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I suppose a lot of you heard Billy Graham’s sermon from the National Cathedral in Washington D.C. I really, really liked it. Nope, I’m not protestant. So that means you can’t listen to the words anyone who is a protestant? What about Jews? Can you listen to their words? Christ was a Jew. Guess you don’t listen to him either. It is your type of bigotry and hatred that led to these unspeakable acts of terror. When are you people ever going to get it? CeCe

Who holds the full truth? Why listen to half truths? As Christ told his Apostles, let them be! As for a being a bigot, your action exposes you for what you are!

Response:

"CeCe" wrote … I suppose a lot of you heard Billy Graham’s sermon from the National Cathedral in Washington D.C. I really, really liked it. Nope, I’m not protestant. So that means you can’t listen to the words anyone who is a protestant? What about Jews? Can you listen to their words? Christ was a Jew. Guess you don’t listen to him either. It is your type of bigotry and hatred that led to these unspeakable acts of terror. When are you people ever going to get it?

+ Hey, lighten up, cece…. + I didn’t listen to him either. + I also didn’t listen to the cardinal who spoke. + I never listen to Faraquan, Oral Roberts or Pat robertson. + I never listen to Jimmy Swaggart, Tammy Fay, or saddam. + I never listen to Jesse Jackson, Hillary Clinton or Dan Rather. + Sometimes we already know what they will say. + Sometimes we don’t agree with them politically. + It doesn’t mean we become: "YOU PEOPLE…"

Response:

Then maybe we can become "youse guys" :0) Bruce — Blessed are the flexible, for they shall not be bent out of shape.

Response:

I guess I’m not either, then, Bruce. Billy Graham may not play for our team, but what’s wrong with taking comfort from the words of another Christian when his words are wise?

Response:

Howdy CeCe !! I can think of three possible reasons you have come to this newsgroup. 1 – you are nobly attempting to show us the error of our Catholic ways so that we can be TRULY saved. We welcome this type of discussion if it is a civil one. 2 – you want to learn more before you convert to Catholicism. Yeah !!! 3 – you are trying to pick fights with us because you disagree with us. It is obvious that you are only interested in picking fights. With your departure from this ng, you will take your hate with you. Isn’t there an anti-Cath ng out there where you can find friends? I hereby invite you to leave. alt.religion.christian.roman-catholic michel

with sense, reason, and intellect has intended us to forego their use. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – –Galileo Galilei

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – "CeCe" wrote … I suppose a lot of you heard Billy Graham’s sermon from the National Cathedral in Washington D.C. I really, really liked it. Nope, I’m not protestant. So that means you can’t listen to the words anyone who is a protestant? What about Jews? Can you listen to their words? Christ was a Jew. Guess you don’t listen to him either. It is your type of bigotry and hatred that led to these unspeakable acts of terror. When are you people ever going to get it? + Hey, lighten up, cece…. + I didn’t listen to him either. + I also didn’t listen to the cardinal who spoke. + I never listen to Faraquan, Oral Roberts or Pat robertson. + I never listen to Jimmy Swaggart, Tammy Fay, or saddam. + I never listen to Jesse Jackson, Hillary Clinton or Dan Rather. + Sometimes we already know what they will say. + Sometimes we don’t agree with them politically. + It doesn’t mean we become: "YOU PEOPLE…"

I like Billy Graham. Does that mean I’m not one of the "you people"? Bruce

Response:

What a strange response. What a lost person you are. — Bruce "Soli Deo gloria"

Response:

I suppose a lot of you heard Billy Graham’s sermon from the National Cathedral in Washington D.C. I really, really liked it.

Nope, I’m not protestant.

Response:

I suppose a lot of you heard Billy Graham’s sermon from the National Cathedral in Washington D.C. I really, really liked it. Nope, I’m not protestant.

So that means you can’t listen to the words anyone who is a protestant? What about Jews? Can you listen to their words? Christ was a Jew. Guess you don’t listen to him either. It is your type of bigotry and hatred that led to these unspeakable acts of terror. When are you people ever going to get it? CeCe — I do not feel obligated to believe that the same God who has endowed us with sense, reason, and intellect has intended us to forego their use. –Galileo Galilei

Response:

I suppose a lot of you heard Billy Graham’s sermon from the National Cathedral in Washington D.C. I really, really liked it.

Response:

I suppose a lot of you heard Billy Graham’s sermon from the National Cathedral in Washington D.C. I really, really liked it.

Yes, he makes one think. There are not too many like him. — Bruce "Soli Deo gloria"

Response:

Duke of Kent's son forfeits royal line to become Roman Catholic

admin — Sun, 19 Aug 2001 00:00:00 +0000

Question:

Response:

(mary) emanated:

You mean to "become" the Living Dead? FTT

Response:

(mary) emanated:

LOL — Alan Ferris eligo, ergo sum Atheist #1211 EAC(UK)#252 Ironic Torture Div. When the only colour is black – the only sound the broken bell THEN talk to me about why. Spike Milligan www.arcerland.com ICQ UIN: 12811297

Response:

Duke of Kent’s son forfeits royal line to become Roman Catholic ANOTHER member of the royal family has left the Church of England and become a Roman Catholic. Lord Nicholas Windsor, the younger son of the Duke and Duchess of Kent, has forfeited his 25th place in line to the throne as a result of his decision. He follows in the footsteps of his mother, who embraced Catholicism in 1994, becoming the highest profile royal convert in recent times. His brother, the Earl of St Andrews, is also ruled out of the line of succession because he married Silvana Tomaselli, a Canadian academic who is a Catholic. Their uncle, Prince Michael of Kent, lost his right of succession to the throne when he married a Catholic, Baroness Marie-Christine von Reibnitz (now known as Princess Michael), in 1978. According to the Act of Settlement of 1701, no Roman Catholic can accede to the throne and nobody in line can remain in succession if he or she marries or becomes a Roman Catholic. Yesterday Nicholas, 31, confirmed that he had become a Catholic. "I can confirm that it is true, but I would prefer to say no more than that," he said. "I consider the time and place to be a private matter." The reception is understood to have taken place last Easter. It is likely to have been part of the church’s rite of Christian initiation for adults, whereby a group seeking admission to the church is prepared and received together. It is usual for this to culminate in the Easter vigil, the principal act of worship of the Christian year. Nicholas drew unwelcome attention to himself as an 18-year-old when – after finishing his A-levels at Harrow – he was detained with a friend in St James’s Park in London and charged with possession of cannabis. He was let off with a caution because the quantity of the drug found was so small. Recently friends have commented on his deepening interest in the Christian faith. He has become a regular visitor to Heythrop College, a Jesuit foundation within the University of London. His mother joined the Catholic church two years after the Church of England was plunged into turmoil following its decision in 1992 to ordain women priests. The duchess has, however, not become partisan in her religious practice and still regularly attends events at St Paul’s Cathedral in London. The duke and duchess, with their family, have for years attended the annual Christmas Eve carol service at the cathedral. The duchess has also given public support to the Royal Ulster Constabulary in its determination to preserve its name. The Act of Settlement was passed by parliament to consolidate the position of William of Orange, who took the throne and accepted a bill of rights that debarred anyone who "shall profess the popish religion or shall marry a papist". The act has recently been the subject of considerable controversy as it is seen by many of the 5m Roman Catholics in Britain to be discriminatory and deeply offensive. Senior figures in the Church of England, including the Archbishop of York, as well as senior Labour politicians are sympathetic to amending the act to remove the prohibition on Roman Catholics occupying the throne. http://www.sunday-times.co.uk/news/pages/sti/2001/08/19/stinwenws0302…

Response:

Maureen Reagan Mourned at Service

admin — Sat, 18 Aug 2001 00:00:00 +0000

Question:

Maureen Reagan Mourned at Service 08/18/01 SACRAMENTO – Maureen Reagan, daughter of the former president, was praised Saturday by people arriving for her funeral as a tireless crusader against Alzheimer’s disease. "I don’t know of anybody who in such a short amount of time has brought so much awareness to Alzheimer’s," said Orien Reid, who chairs the Alzheimer’s Association’s board of directors. "I think it was the love for her dad that drove her." Ms. Reagan’s mother, Jane Wyman, arrived an hour before the service. Stepmother Nancy Reagan arrived later, holding hands with Ms. Reagan’s half-sister, Patti Reagan. Her father, Ronald Reagan, was not expected to attend. The 90-year-old former president, who is stricken with Alzheimer’s disease, was to stay behind at his Bel-Air home. "He would be confused. With what he’s got going on in his own life, attending would do more harm," son Michael Reagan said last week. Ms. Reagan’s maple casket, decorated with a spray of pink roses and white mums, was borne by Secret Service agents into the 112-year-old Cathedral of the Blessed Sacrament. The agents all had been assigned to Ms. Reagan at one point. Reagan’s sons Michael and Ron were expected to offer prayers of intercession during the Roman Catholic services. Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Christie Whitman, California Gov. Gray Davis and Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., were expected to speak. Ms. Reagan, 60, died Aug. 8 at her Granite Bay home after a nine-month battle with skin cancer that progressed from a melanoma diagnosis in 1996 to tumors in her hip and brain. The former president’s first child, Ms. Reagan traveled the nation nearly nonstop in the final years of her life, ignoring her own declining health as she spread the word about Alzheimer’s patients and their caregivers. Ms. Reagan co-chaired the Republican National Committee from 1987 to 1989 and twice sought public office herself. She lost a primary election bid for a U.S. Senate seat from California in 1982 and finished second in a 1992 Republican primary for a California congressional seat. An outspoken feminist, Ms. Reagan sometimes clashed with her father over abortion rights and an equal rights amendment to the Constitution. But despite their disagreements, they were remembered as fiercely loyal to one another. Ms. Reagan became a national spokeswoman for the Alzheimer’s Association after her father announced in 1994 that he had the disease.

Response:

Thanks for this Nightwing, heard about it on the News, Today, if we all we’re public fighters, instead, of hiding, this horrtble disease would be much more understood, darlene

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Maureen Reagan Mourned at Service 08/18/01 SACRAMENTO – Maureen Reagan, daughter of the former president, was praised Saturday by people arriving for her funeral as a tireless crusader against Alzheimer’s disease. "I don’t know of anybody who in such a short amount of time has brought so much awareness to Alzheimer’s," said Orien Reid, who chairs the Alzheimer’s Association’s board of directors. "I think it was the love for her dad that drove her." Ms. Reagan’s mother, Jane Wyman, arrived an hour before the service. Stepmother Nancy Reagan arrived later, holding hands with Ms. Reagan’s half-sister, Patti Reagan. Her father, Ronald Reagan, was not expected to attend. The 90-year-old former president, who is stricken with Alzheimer’s disease, was to stay behind at his Bel-Air home. "He would be confused. With what he’s got going on in his own life, attending would do more harm," son Michael Reagan said last week. Ms. Reagan’s maple casket, decorated with a spray of pink roses and white mums, was borne by Secret Service agents into the 112-year-old Cathedral of the Blessed Sacrament. The agents all had been assigned to Ms. Reagan at one point. Reagan’s sons Michael and Ron were expected to offer prayers of intercession during the Roman Catholic services. Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Christie Whitman, California Gov. Gray Davis and Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., were expected to speak. Ms. Reagan, 60, died Aug. 8 at her Granite Bay home after a nine-month battle with skin cancer that progressed from a melanoma diagnosis in 1996 to tumors in her hip and brain. The former president’s first child, Ms. Reagan traveled the nation nearly nonstop in the final years of her life, ignoring her own declining health as she spread the word about Alzheimer’s patients and their caregivers. Ms. Reagan co-chaired the Republican National Committee from 1987 to 1989 and twice sought public office herself. She lost a primary election bid for a U.S. Senate seat from California in 1982 and finished second in a 1992 Republican primary for a California congressional seat. An outspoken feminist, Ms. Reagan sometimes clashed with her father over abortion rights and an equal rights amendment to the Constitution. But despite their disagreements, they were remembered as fiercely loyal to one another. Ms. Reagan became a national spokeswoman for the Alzheimer’s Association after her father announced in 1994 that he had the disease.

Response:

Catholic Church apologises for mass murder

admin — Sun, 27 May 2001 00:00:00 +0000

Question:

CB, Protestants refer to Christians who are not Catholic. — That’s not necessarily true. I’m Christian and I don’t protest your false religion. I just expose the lies of the rcc. I am sorry that you feel that the Catholic Church finds it necessary to lie. It is unfortunate that you have taken this view, as I believe, after much research, that it actually teaches the truth as passed down by apostolistic tradition (since the apostles predate the New Testament).

Your point? Does that mean the Bible is not true? If there is any particular subject that you’d like to discuss, I’d be happy to in a respectful way. However, you’re assertions that a particular Church "lies", and yet not providing proof, is particularly vexing, given the doctrine that Jesus teaches to ALL Christians – love thy fellow man.

I have proved it many times over. I don’t think you are advancing this by vindictive posts. All I can say is "What would Jesus say to the spirit of your postings?" Regardless of how you feel about the Catholic Church, this is certainly not the way to go about disagreeing with it (as per Christ’s teachings)

According to whom? You? The rcc? To someone who feels a need to protect a lie? I speak the Truth. If you don’t like it, please feel free to ignore it. Most catholics ignore Truth. The others just do what the pope says without even knowing why. Joe Kussey

– 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:

CB, Protestants refer to Christians who are not Catholic.

– That’s not necessarily true. I’m Christian and I don’t protest your false religion. I just expose the lies of the rcc.

I am sorry that you feel that the Catholic Church finds it necessary to lie. It is unfortunate that you have taken this view, as I believe, after much research, that it actually teaches the truth as passed down by apostolistic tradition (since the apostles predate the New Testament). If there is any particular subject that you’d like to discuss, I’d be happy to in a respectful way. However, you’re assertions that a particular Church "lies", and yet not providing proof, is particularly vexing, given the doctrine that Jesus teaches to ALL Christians – love thy fellow man. I don’t think you are advancing this by vindictive posts. All I can say is "What would Jesus say to the spirit of your postings?" Regardless of how you feel about the Catholic Church, this is certainly not the way to go about disagreeing with it (as per Christ’s teachings) SIncerely, Joe Kussey

Response:

CB, I am sorry that you feel that the Catholic Church finds it necessary to lie. It is unfortunate that you have taken this view, as I believe, after much research, that it actually teaches the truth as passed down by apostolistic tradition (since the apostles predate the New Testament). Your point? Does that mean the Bible is not true?

How do you come up with that? Where does it say in my reply to you that the Bible is false??? I am only saying that I am not aware of these "lies" that you purport that the Catholic Church finds necessary to tell. I am not a life long Catholic, am not brainwashed, etc. After researching both sides (protestant and catholic), I have come to the conclusion that the Catholic Church WAS established by Christ, is the guardian of scripture, and the legitimate interpreter of the Bible. I have yet to see you disprove that. If there is any particular subject that you’d like to discuss, I’d be happy to in a respectful way. However, you’re assertions that a particular Church "lies", and yet not providing proof, is particularly vexing, given the doctrine that Jesus teaches to ALL Christians – love thy fellow man. I have proved it many times over.

Not to me. Humour me. I don’t think you are advancing this by vindictive posts. All I can say is "What would Jesus say to the spirit of your postings?" Regardless of how you feel about the Catholic Church, this is certainly not the way to go about disagreeing with it (as per Christ’s teachings) According to whom? You? The rcc? To someone who feels a need to protect a lie? I speak the Truth. If you don’t like it, please feel free to ignore it. Most catholics ignore Truth. The others just do what the pope says without even knowing why.

According to any unbiased observer. You come up with outlandish accusations, such as the Pope is sending a million people to hell, etc., but you can’t back it up. Prove to me a different church was commissioned on this earth by Jesus Christ. Prove to me millions are going to hell because of the Catholic Church. I understand you disagree with the Catholic interpretation of things. However, can’t we agree to disagree? What is the purpose for these unwarranted attacks? Any atheist reading these posts (or unbiased person) will see that you are the one advancing vindictive, unsubstantiated attacks, not me. You are certainly NOT advancing the Word of Jesus in this manner. As to the Truth, truth is not relative. You have not proven anything by simply stating that your interpretation is correct. It is unconvincing not only to Catholics, but any third person entering this conversation. So again, I say to you…Prove it. Show me why the Pope is wrong, etc…. Regards, Joe Kussey

Response:

CB, I’ve been looking for this "protestant" church for a long time. Could you please direct me in finding one? Is the "protestant church" an organized religion like the rcc? If not, then your posts make no sense. BTW, I’ve never killed anyone. Protestants refer to Christians who are not Catholic. Amazing as it seems, there are some in Ireland.

And in California too, right Danny? Err… CB? Anyway….

Response:

Joe, I think I love you. The hypocrisy and scapegoating do get tiresome, don’t they? You’d think the average Protestant hasn’t cracked a history book in years or is so blinded by the Dave Hunt-Jack Chickesque propaganda that they’d reject the Truth if it crawled into their lap and cuddled. Tracy <—statue-worshipping, romanish, cannibalistic, ring-kissing, Bible-hatin’, goin’-straight-t’Hell Mariolater. Yeah, that’s it. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – CB, I’ve been looking for this "protestant" church for a long time. Could you please direct me in finding one? Is the "protestant church" an organized religion like the rcc? If not, then your posts make no sense. BTW, I’ve never killed anyone. Protestants refer to Christians who are not Catholic. Amazing as it seems, there are some in Ireland. I believe if you look in your local phone directory under "Protestant", you will find many various assundry of "churches". As to organization, some "protestant churches" are locally organized, such as Baptists, and others have national organization, like the Lutherans. However, being that there are so many protestant churches, it is hard to keep up with them. As to you killing anyone, what does that have to do with anything? Neither have I, and I am Catholic… Regards, Joe Kussey

Response:

That’s not necessarily true. I’m Christian and I don’t protest your false religion. I just expose the lies of the rcc. Amazing as it seems, there are some in Ireland. I believe if you look in your local phone directory under "Protestant", you will find many various assundry of "churches".

Maybe you could help me. As to organization, some "protestant churches" are locally organized, such as Baptists, and others have national organization, like the Lutherans. However, being that there are so many protestant churches, it is hard to keep up with them. As to you killing anyone, what does that have to do with anything? Neither have I, and I am Catholic… Regards, Joe Kussey

Response:

Tamas The pope personally initiated the 4th crusade and gave blessings to participant warriors. Then he silently told them that they can stop at Constantinople if they wished and do to the orthodox, what they would have done to muslims in Jerusalem. And finally accepted stolen goods gathered there. You are incorrect. I just happen to be a historian and must tell you that you discuss only half of the story. Although the Pope "initiated" the Crusades, there is no record of such "secrets" that you imply.

Thanks Joe. That was very interesting to read. I really appreciate your taking the time, and making the effort. Peace, Lisa http://users.javanet.com/~lanat/lisa.htm http://users.rcn.com/projectrachel http://users.javanet.com/~lanat/life.htm

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – If you apologise for something, it implies that you were responsible for it. I don’t believe that the church officially condoned the massacre, so what is it doing saying sorry? If I went to confession and asked forgiveness for my friend’s sins the priest might tell me off for wasting his time. Such apologies may be well-intentioned but they do the church no good. They just play into the hands of its critics, allowing them to say: "You see? It is corrupt.". Apologies also pander to those who deliberately or unintentionally confuse the teaching of the church with the way her members behave. Some use the fact that Catholics sin as a pretext for non-belief.

I share you views on the ‘apologies saga’, or I did, until I read that the Holy Father did not apologise to the Greeks. He asked God for forgiveness. This is a different matter, because it suggests that the souls of the Catholics who may have sinned were the objects of the Pope’s attention. Stephen

Response:

Protestants refer to Christians who are not Catholic. Amazing as it seems, there are some in Ireland. I believe if you look in your local phone directory under "Protestant", you will find many various assundry of "churches". As to organization, some "protestant churches" are locally organized, such as Baptists, and others have national organization, like the Lutherans. However, being that there are so many protestant churches, it is hard to keep up with them. As to you killing anyone, what does that have to do with anything? Neither have I, and I am Catholic… Regards, Joe Kussey

Response:

Lisa, Glad you liked it. Amazing how many half-truths are floating around about Catholics… Joe

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Tamas The pope personally initiated the 4th crusade and gave blessings to participant warriors. Then he silently told them that they can stop at Constantinople if they wished and do to the orthodox, what they would have done to muslims in Jerusalem. And finally accepted stolen goods gathered there. You are incorrect. I just happen to be a historian and must tell you that you discuss only half of the story. Although the Pope "initiated" the Crusades, there is no record of such "secrets" that you imply. Thanks Joe. That was very interesting to read. I really appreciate your taking the time, and making the effort. Peace, Lisa http://users.javanet.com/~lanat/lisa.htm http://users.rcn.com/projectrachel http://users.javanet.com/~lanat/life.htm

Response:

*Pope Innocent III, neither knew about nor sanctioned in the least this massacre and sacrilegious pillage. In fact, he had FORBIDDEN the Crusaders, on pain of EXCOMMUNICATION,

"Pain" of excommunication? That would be a blessing, not pain. Joe Kussey

Response:

I knew the rcc is corrupt long before any confession by pope. Apologies also pander to those who deliberately or unintentionally confuse the teaching of the church with the way her members behave. Some use the fact that Catholics sin as a pretext for non-belief.

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – CB So when is the Protestants going to apologize to the Catholics in Ireland? How about the THOUSANDS of English woman who were burned at the stake by Protestants? When are you going to realize that more Catholics were killed by Protestants during the 4 centuries of Inquisitions then Protestants? When are they going to apologize for what happened at Salem? When are the Protestants going to apologize to Catholics for murders they participated in during the Middle Ages in Germany? Why are you such a hypocrite?

I’ve been looking for this "protestant" church for a long time. Could you please direct me in finding one? Is the "protestant church" an organized religion like the rcc? If not, then your posts make no sense. BTW, I’ve never killed anyone. Joe Kussey

Response:

You are incorrect. I just happen to be a historian and must tell you that you discuss only half of the story. Although the Pope "initiated" the Crusades, there is no record of such "secrets" that you imply. *Pope Innocent III, neither knew about nor sanctioned in the least this massacre and sacrilegious pillage. In fact, he had FORBIDDEN the Crusaders, on pain of EXCOMMUNICATION, to attack Byzantium, instructing the leader, Boniface of Montferrat, that: "The crusade must not attack Christians, but should proceed as quickly as possible to the Holy Land." He only found out the full horror of what had happened more than eight months later, and wrote to Cardinal Peter Capuano, denouncing the sack in no uncertain terms: These "soldiers of Christ" who should have turned their swords against the infidel have steeped them in Christian blood, sparing neither religion, nor age, nor sex . . . They stripped the altars of silver, violated the sanctuaries, robbed icons and crosses and relics . . . The Latins have given example only of perversity and works of darkness. No wonder the Greeks call them dogs!" {cited in Carroll, ibid., p. 158; from Mann, Popes of the Middle Ages, vol. 12, pp. 266-267} ***Yet there had been several similar scandalous atrocities or unsavory, treacherous incidents which occurred BEFORE the sack, on the part of the Byzantines, which have not received their due attention. For the sake of fairness and historical objectivity (not polemics and controversy), we will review some of these. Warren Carroll notes: Horrible and utterly indefensible as the sack was, it should in justice be remembered that it was not totally unprovoked; more than once (as in the massacre of 1182) the Greeks of Constantinople had treated the Latins there as they were now being treated . . . Historians who wax eloquent and indignant – with considerable reason – about the sack of Constantinople . . . rarely if ever mention the massacre of the westerners in Constantinople in 1182 . . . a nightmarish massacre of thousands [about 2000 Greeks were killed in Constantinople in 1204, according to secular historian Will Durant], . . . in which the slaughterers spared neither women nor children, neither old nor sick, neither priest nor monk. Cardinal John, the Pope’s representative, was beheaded and his head was dragged through the streets at the tail of a dog; children were cut out of their mother’s wombs; bodies of dead Westerners were exhumed and abused; some 4,000 who escaped death were sold into slavery to the Turks. {Carroll, ibid., pp. 157, 131} Bishop Ware also honorably writes about the Orthodox share of the blame in these massacres: Each . . . must look back at the past with sorrow and repentance. Both sides must in honesty acknowledge that they could and should have done more to prevent the schism. Both sides were guilty of mistakes on the human level. Orthodox, for example, must blame themselves for the pride and contempt with which during the Byzantine period they regarded the west; they must blame themselves for incidents such as the riot of 1182, when many Latin residents at Constantinople were massacred by the Byzantine populace. {Ware, ibid., p. 70} Catholic historian Warren Carroll recalls two other lamentable Byzantine incidents: In 1171, on the orders or at least with the tacit approval of the Byzantine government, thousands of Venetians in the Eastern empire had been killed, mutilated, or arrested and held for years in prison. {Carroll, ibid., p. 150} [In 1188] Frederick Barbarossa . . . requested permission of the Eastern Emperor, Isaac II Angelus, for passage of his army through Byzantine dominions on the way to the Holy Land, and for the right to purchase food for his troops within them. Isaac said he agreed . . . but in fact Isaac was resolved to oppose the passage of the crusaders, and made contact with Saladin [the Muslim commander] to concert plans "to delay and destroy the German army." About this "Byzantine treachery" there is no doubt; even the many modern Western historians sympathetic to Byzantium and hostile to the Crusades have to admit it [e.g., Emperor Isaac, in 1187, had written Saladin to congratulate him for his great achievement of re-taking Jerusalem from the Latin crusaders] . . . [Frederick's envoys, imprisoned for a time] returned to Frederick . . . with infuriating (and accurate) reports of the Byzantine alliance with Saladin, plans to destroy the crusading army as it crossed the Dardanelles, and the violent anti-Western attitude of Patriarch Dositheus of Constantinople, who had offered unconditional absolution to any Greek killing a Westerner. Frederick passed on this information to his son Henry, . . . to ask the Pope’s approval for a crusade against the Eastern Empire because of its treachery and dealings with the enemy. No Papal approval was given and Frederick soon thought better of the idea . . . Though a war against Christians was indubitably a perversion of the crusading ideal, Emperor Isaac’s acts against the crusaders had clearly been acts of war . . . Everything that the Fourth Crusade later did to Christendom’s discredit, Frederick Barbarossa refused to do, though he was directly provoked as the leaders of the Fourth Crusade never were. The extent of Byzantine provocation of the Third Crusade is obvious from the sequence of events. It would be a long time before anyone in the West would trust them again. {Carroll, ibid., pp. 130, 132-133} As can be seen by the above quotes, the Byzantines in Constantinople were not innocents. Nor did the Third Crusades destroy Constantinople, despite the rules of war suggesting that they had every right to after discovery Byzantinium traitorous behaviour. So to focus on the sack of Constantinople of 1204 is very one-sided and doesn’t get much sympathy from the knowledgeable historian. The only way to compensate would be that Pope goes to Turin, grabs the Holy Shroud and takes it to Moscow ASAP, to present it to the Moscow metropolita, successor to Constantinople’s archbishop. Crusaders confiscated that sacred clotch from Byzant in 1204, so it’s due back and it is the single most precious item in the Universe, a perfect "gift".

As to the Holy Shroud, there is no proof that this is Jesus’ burial wrap – just a man from His time frame. Do you really believe that giving this cloth back will straighten out everything? Will the Byzantium Church then fall in line with the successor of Peter? I highly doubt that would happen, although, in my opinion, this is a legitimate desire. Until the Holy Shroud’s intervention to the Lord wins friendly agreement between catholic and orthodox, the Catholic chruch will be unable to properly meet today’s challanges, because its basis is shaken due to the large number of its crimes (against orthodox, indians,etc.) accumulated during history and the spread of consumer mentality among catholic population. Today orthodox and other apostolic churches are more faithful to the teachings, especially if you consider their flocks’ behaviour compared to e.g. NA catholics.

crimes against indians? Which? Are you talking about India? Or American Indians? As to saying which Church is more well behaved and following of the teachings, that is simply conjecture and highly opinionated. One can easily point to atrocities created by Orthodox members, such as recent events in Bosnia, Macedonia, World War 2, massacre after WW1 of a million Turks, etc…However, to attach these atrocities to the CHURCH is ridiculous, just as attaching your above inferences to the Roman Church. The fact that the pope is polish, himself full of hatred towards orthodox slavic nations, especially Russia; propels the catholic church into great danger.

That is utterly ridiculous. John Paul 2 is probably the best Pope for peace that we have had in hundreds of years. Your assertions have no basis. Regards, Joe Kussey

Response:

Talk about lack of gratitude! It was only thanks to the efforts of the western Crusaders that Byzantium got a four hundred year stay of execution. Considering how much it cost the average Frank, Briton or German to get over to the middle-east, it is not surprising that eventually they became sick and tired of the cowardly and treachorous Byzantines. Maybe the Greeks might like to apologize for not pulling their weight in the war against Islam all those years ago. Heinz

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Regards, Good point. This is like the Catholics apologizing for the sacking of Constantinople in 1204. The Pope expressly forbid such behavior under threat of ex-communication, yet, the 4th Crusades sacked Constantinople in what can be accurately termed a revenge atrocity for what happened to Christians in Constantinople in 1172. snipped Sincerely: Tamas Feher.

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Sunday, 27 May, 2001, 13:47 GMT 14:47 UK Poland to apologise for Jewish massacre The Polish Roman Catholic Church will apologise today for the killing of about 1,600 Jews in a pogrom during World War II. A special ceremony will be held in a cathedral near the old Jewish ghetto in the capital, Warsaw. The country’s chief rabbi, Michael Schudrich, has welcomed the apology, but declined to attend the ceremony – which correspondents say is a sign of the sensitivity of the issue. Until recently the Nazis were blamed for the attack in 1941 in which the Jewish people were burned alive in a barn. But new research published in a book has suggested Poles carried it out, provoking a nationwide debate over the country’s war-time role. Ceremony at 1700GMT. From the newsroom of the BBC World Service "Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction." -Blaise Pascal, philosopher and mathematician (1623-1662)

How many more apologies are forthcoming from the rcc? I wonder if apologizing for murder makes everything OK? — 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:

CB So when is the Protestants going to apologize to the Catholics in Ireland? How about the THOUSANDS of English woman who were burned at the stake by Protestants? When are you going to realize that more Catholics were killed by Protestants during the 4 centuries of Inquisitions then Protestants? When are they going to apologize for what happened at Salem? When are the Protestants going to apologize to Catholics for murders they participated in during the Middle Ages in Germany? Why are you such a hypocrite? Joe Kussey

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Sunday, 27 May, 2001, 13:47 GMT 14:47 UK Poland to apologise for Jewish massacre The Polish Roman Catholic Church will apologise today for the killing of about 1,600 Jews in a pogrom during World War II. A special ceremony will be held in a cathedral near the old Jewish ghetto in the capital, Warsaw. The country’s chief rabbi, Michael Schudrich, has welcomed the apology, but declined to attend the ceremony – which correspondents say is a sign of the sensitivity of the issue. Until recently the Nazis were blamed for the attack in 1941 in which the Jewish people were burned alive in a barn. But new research published in a book has suggested Poles carried it out, provoking a nationwide debate over the country’s war-time role. Ceremony at 1700GMT. From the newsroom of the BBC World Service "Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction." -Blaise Pascal, philosopher and mathematician (1623-1662) How many more apologies are forthcoming from the rcc? I wonder if apologizing for murder makes everything OK? — 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:

Regards, – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Good point. This is like the Catholics apologizing for the sacking of Constantinople in 1204. The Pope expressly forbid such behavior under threat of ex-communication, yet, the 4th Crusades sacked Constantinople in what can be accurately termed a revenge atrocity for what happened to Christians in Constantinople in 1172. This story in Poland is another example of good Christians gone bad (Do we really know all of the circumstances? This was in the middle of WW2) …However, I don’t see how this reflects on the Catholic Church, considering that the Church did not condone or initiate this. Is the Church really responsible for all of its members actions? I don’t think it can possibly held accountable.

But the The pope personally initiated the 4th crusade and gave blessings to participant warriors. Then he silently told them that they can stop at Constantinople if they wished and do to the orthodox, what they would have done to muslims in Jerusalem. And finally accepted stolen goods gathered there. The only way to compensate would be that Pope goes to Turin, grabs the Holy Shroud and takes it to Moscow ASAP, to present it to the Moscow metropolita, successor to Constantinople’s archbishop. Crusaders confiscated that sacred clotch from Byzant in 1204, so it’s due back and it is the single most precious item in the Universe, a perfect "gift". Until the Holy Shroud’s intervention to the Lord wins friendly agreement between catholic and orthodox, the Catholic chruch will be unable to properly meet today’s challanges, because its basis is shaken due to the large number of its crimes (against orthodox, indians,etc.) accumulated during history and the spread of consumer mentality among catholic population. Today orthodox and other apostolic churches are more faithful to the teachings, especially if you consider their flocks’ behaviour compared to e.g. NA catholics. The fact that the pope is polish, himself full of hatred towards orthodox slavic nations, especially Russia; propels the catholic church into great danger. Sincerely: Tamas Feher.

Response:

If you apologise for something, it implies that you were responsible for it. I don’t believe that the church officially condoned the massacre, so what is it doing saying sorry? If I went to confession and asked forgiveness for my friend’s sins the priest might tell me off for wasting his time. Such apologies may be well-intentioned but they do the church no good. They just play into the hands of its critics, allowing them to say: "You see? It is corrupt.". Apologies also pander to those who deliberately or unintentionally confuse the teaching of the church with the way her members behave. Some use the fact that Catholics sin as a pretext for non-belief.

Response:

Sunday, 27 May, 2001, 13:47 GMT 14:47 UK Poland to apologise for Jewish massacre The Polish Roman Catholic Church will apologise today for the killing of about 1,600 Jews in a pogrom during World War II. A special ceremony will be held in a cathedral near the old Jewish ghetto in the capital, Warsaw. The country’s chief rabbi, Michael Schudrich, has welcomed the apology, but declined to attend the ceremony – which correspondents say is a sign of the sensitivity of the issue. Until recently the Nazis were blamed for the attack in 1941 in which the Jewish people were burned alive in a barn. But new research published in a book has suggested Poles carried it out, provoking a nationwide debate over the country’s war-time role. Ceremony at 1700GMT. From the newsroom of the BBC World Service "Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction." -Blaise Pascal, philosopher and mathematician (1623-1662)

Response:

I can’t see how the church can or needs to apologise. Only those who perpetrated the act need to do that. Maybe the church meant to provide a vehicle for such an apology.

Response:

Paul, Good point. This is like the Catholics apologizing for the sacking of Constantinople in 1204. The Pope expressly forbid such behavior under threat of ex-communication, yet, the 4th Crusades sacked Constantinople in what can be accurately termed a revenge atrocity for what happened to Christians in Constantinople in 1172. This story in Poland is another example of good Christians gone bad (Do we really know all of the circumstances? This was in the middle of WW2) …However, I don’t see how this reflects on the Catholic Church, considering that the Church did not condone or initiate this. Is the Church really responsible for all of its members actions? I don’t think it can possibly held accountable. But the new attitude of reconcilliation will hopefully spur others down this path as well. Sincerely Joe Kussey

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I can’t see how the church can or needs to apologise. Only those who perpetrated the act need to do that. Maybe the church meant to provide a vehicle for such an apology.