H
hxcCatholic413
Guest
care to explain where you believe Church has changed its position on slavery? God Bless!
- Status
S
sidbrown
Guest
In the early Church slaves were told to obey their masters with fear and trembling. The present teaching is that slavery is wrong.
Let all who are under the yoke of slavery regard their masters as worthy of all honor, so that the name of God and the teaching may not be blasphemed. Those who have believing masters must not be disrespectful to them on the ground that they are members of the church; rather they must serve them all the more, since those who benefit by their service are believers and beloved. (1 Timothy 6:1-2)
Who then is the faithful and wise slave, whom his master has put in charge of his household, to give the other slaves their allowance of food at the proper time? Blessed is that slave whom his master will find at work when he arrives. (Matt. 24:45-46)
Slaves, obey your earthly masters with fear and trembling, in singleness of heart, as you obey Christ; not only while being watched, and in order to please them, but as slaves of Christ, doing the will of God from the heart. (Eph. 6:5-6)
Tell slaves to be submissive to their masters and to give satisfaction in every respect; they are not to talk back, not to pilfer, but to show complete and perfect fidelity, so that in everything they may be an ornament to the doctrine of God our Savior. (Titus 2:9-10)
Slaves, accept the authority of your masters with all deference, not only those who are kind and gentle but also those who are harsh. For it is a credit to you if, being aware of God, you endure pain while suffering unjustly. If you endure when you are beaten for doing wrong, what credit is that? But if you endure when you do right and suffer for it, you have God’s approval. (1Pet. 2:18-29)
Also, see the papal bull Dum diversis.
B
benidict
Guest
I will be back in Hawaii by the time your second son goes to Afghanistan. I shall pray very hard for them. Are they stationed together? I think they are amazing. God bless you and all of yours. and the sacrifices your family is making for our country.
P
pnewton
Guest
There was not change in doctrine of faith and morals. At the time of the New Testament, slavery was a reality. Paul gave instructions on the way to live with in that reality. The Church also instructed Christians in the second and third century not to renounce Christ in the face of martyrdom. This was not approval of martyring Christians. Each of you “changes” is an issue in and of itself. There is no question that the Church changes in response to the times. These changes are disciplinary and based on prudence, not changes in faith and morals.
B
benidict
Guest
Ok. So I think you and I agree. It has to be a combination of both.
A
Alaino
Guest
Ya I know what ya mean, I have an issue with the no sex before marriage thing 
but I’m good with the no condoms rule. 
Joking
but I’m good with the no condoms rule. Joking
B
benidict
Guest
Interesting. I could go somewhere with this, in defense of your postiton, but I wont.Ya I know what ya mean, I have an issue with the no sex before marriage thing
Joking
Are you joking about the no sex before marriage, or the condom usage? I actually believe its a good Idea to wait till marriage. But there is a flip side I could explore. Just not here. LOL! I have someone that actually wants to push this, and Im telling her no. Not until theres a ring on the finger, and I hear an I DO, and A YOU May now kiss the bride…I wont budge on it. Its for her benefit.
B
Bohm_Bawerk
Guest
My only problem with those who disagree with Church teaching is that it inevitably leads to a slippery slope. When you try to justify one sin, after such “justification”, you then move on to the next sin, and the sin after that, and then the sin after that. And with every single progression, the gravity of the sin increases. The end result can only be the complete destruction of morality and ethics.
There is only one doctrine that I struggle understanding, and it is an issue that poses a problem for 90%+ Catholics in the Western world. You can probably figure it out; it shouldn’t be that difficult. That said, I put my trust that what the Church teaches is true, lest we fall into the abyss of immorality.
Thank you,
Eugen von Böhm-Bawerk
There is only one doctrine that I struggle understanding, and it is an issue that poses a problem for 90%+ Catholics in the Western world. You can probably figure it out; it shouldn’t be that difficult. That said, I put my trust that what the Church teaches is true, lest we fall into the abyss of immorality.
Thank you,
Eugen von Böhm-Bawerk
S
Spirithound
Guest
Slavery in the 1st century was indentured servitude. These people were working off a debt. Racial slavery in more modern times did not operate on the basis of a debt, they were just unpaid labour.
S
Spirithound
Guest
We can disagree on some things. It is good you have no disagreements with the theological doctrines.
I have a feeling that the social doctrines are some that we can disagree with. Frankly I can’t think of any social doctrines, other than “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.” What I am most curious about is how, if they are not in the Bible, at least implicitly, the Church came to teach these doctrines. lol, Brother, this is killin me! Why not start a new thread about your disagreements?
B
benidict
Guest
I appreciate the support for doing so, but honestly, I am nauseated debating these two things. The ultra right, are no different than the ultra left, and they both make me sick. they may have different views, but the way they defend them, or debate them are identical. I may in the future, but Im just kinda tired. And I am going to be gone for a couple weeks, so I wouldnt be able to participate in them. When I do though, I will be ready to list them and defend them. But I can guarantee its gonna get ugly. with Both of them its funny though. When we debated these before, we had 3 people from completely different ideologies, and faiths that agreed. Me, and agnostic and a Jew. One, being myself, being more conservatife. My agnostic friend being more liberal, and our Jewish friend, who just makes perfect sense. Now if the three of us can come to agreement. then shouldnt that tell people from the hard right, there may be something to it? Normally I would not agree with the left on anything. I love these two people to pieces though. Peace
C
cathoichelp
Guest
Do unto to others… (the golden rule) …
Was borrowed from Confucius
“What is loathsome to thee, do not to another.”
Was borrowed from Confucius
“What is loathsome to thee, do not to another.”
L
LilyM
Guest
Sure, because we all know that 1st-century Jews were so totally steeped in and exposed to Confucian philosophy. They would probably have not even known that such a place as China or such a person as Confucius existed.
And of course we all know that the same 1st-century Jews totally ignored the great Jewish philosopher Hillel saying virtually the same thing at around the time of Jesus’ birth, as other Jewish teachers had before him.
I’d say BOTH Confucius’ and Jesus’ versions of the ‘Golden Rule’, not to mention the many many others, are based in pure old sound common sense, which crosses borders and cultures.
S
sidbrown
Guest
“For many centuries the Church was part of a slave-holding society. The popes themselves held slaves, including at times hundreds of Muslim captives to man their galleys. Throughout Christian antiquity and the Middle Ages, theologians generally followed St. Augustine in holding that although slavery was not written into the natural moral law it was not absolutely forbidden by that law. St. Thomas Aquinas, Luther, and Calvin were all Augustinian on this point. Although the subjection of one person to another (servitus) was not part of the primary intention of the natural law, St. Thomas taught, it was appropriate and socially useful in a world impaired by original sin….Bishop Francis P. Kenrick held that slavery did not necessarily violate the natural law….No Father or Doctor of the Church, so far as I can judge, was an unqualified abolitionist. No pope or council ever made a sweeping condemnation of slavery as such….”
See: firstthings.com/article/2007/01/development-or-reversal-37
S
Spirithound
Guest
Did you read that link? It’s the answer to your question.
S
sidbrown
Guest
I didn’t have a question.
S
sidbrown
Guest
Pope Nicholas V issued the papal bull Dum Diversas on 18 June, 1452. It authorised Alfonso V of Portugal to reduce any ‘Saracens (Muslims) and pagans and any other unbelievers’ to perpetual slavery. I don;t see where they were working off any debt.
B
benedictus2
Guest
I would like to invite you to get a copy of Russell Ford’s conversion story. You can download it for $3 from here
lighthousecatholicmedia.org/store/title/no-escape-from-prison-to-the-catholic-faith
Towards the end of the story he told the story of one of those he has helped convert to the Catholic faith and gives his reason why he is opposed to the death penalty.
B
benidict
Guest
Interesting, my dear friend. I did not know this. Also Paul borrowed from pagan poets, in his letters. I think confucius and Buddha, were very wise men. Also there is a saying from Jesus I find very interesting. If your Eye is full of light, then the whole body is full of light. What Eye was he refering too?
One cannot help but notice a touch of Far Eastern Philosophy in the bible, if one really studies it. Peace
B
benidict
Guest
Hi Lily. It is possible they had been exposed to it. especially after the disporia. I am not positive, but I think its safe to assume, the Jews were not ignorant of the world around them. There are alot of mysteries surrounding the Jewish people and what happened after they were scattered. People are still trying to work these out today. They are a fascinating and Awe inspiring people. And as God told Abraham. You will be a blessing to all nations. This has more to do with Christ I think, but Im sure There were many Jewish scolars that traveled. PeaceSure, because we all know that 1st-century Jews were so totally steeped in and exposed to Confucian philosophy. They would probably have not even known that such a place as China or such a person as Confucius existed.
And of course we all know that the same 1st-century Jews totally ignored the great Jewish philosopher Hillel saying virtually the same thing at around the time of Jesus’ birth, as other Jewish teachers had before him.
I’d say BOTH Confucius’ and Jesus’ versions of the ‘Golden Rule’, not to mention the many many others, are based in pure old sound common sense, which crosses borders and cultures.
- Status