French church attacked during Mass, priest murdered [CC]

[JosieN]

Good Morning Josie,

Homosexuality is not a sin in the Catholic Church, Josie.

catholic.com/tracts/homosexuality

How is it not a sin? They must remain chaste, if they don’t (like those in the gay bar) they are living sinful lives.

“Homosexual persons are called to chastity. By the virtues of self-mastery that teach them inner freedom, at times by the support of disinterested friendship, by prayer and sacramental grace, they can and should gradually and resolutely approach Christian perfection” (CCC 2357– 2359).

“**Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders **nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God” (1 Cor. 6:9–10, NIV).

The “IS” guy who wrote the article in Dabiq said that gay people were an affront to Islam, and they are saying the same things about Christians. They are both claimed affronts, but that is where the comparison ends.

You did not make that clear in your first posting. The words you used seemed confusing, or maybe I needed to read it again, as the comparison made no sense to me.

The words of St. Bosco are not to be condemned, though. He was speaking from his experience and viewpoint. Thank God we can show a much more evolved Islam today, in the majority that are more open-minded and focus on God’s mercy.

I am very close to someone who insists she is Catholic and has the pretty much the same opinion as you do. Frankly, her faith has been poisoned by talk radio. She is obedient to her talk radio in-group. Talk radio has led to a corruption of American civility and degradation of the centrality of forgiveness. The talk of so many hosts and their guests is spreading resentment and condemnation. This is not Christianity. Talk radio shows evidence of a backward swing in American morality. I am not saying that the resentment and condemnation is not understandable and forgivable; we are to forgive those hosts who spread hate, and encourage them to forgive.

I do not listened to talk radio, I read many Catholic books, I stay away from the newer Catholic books with opinions contrary to the teachings of the traditional Catholic Church. Many newer books have their own interpretation and are contrary to the truth. What is happening to the teachings is not a rewriting of them but a reinterpretation of them, and a spinning of what the teachings were originally mean to be. You can spin anything these days to make it mean what you want it to mean, but that does not make it true. You can call it being more open minded if you like, but it is really just a way of replacing the old.

To stay on the right path we need the guidance of the Holy Spirit and the love of Jesus Christ to know truth from lies. Many newer interpretations lead us to believe what is nice and easy to accept. They think hell is not real and that everyone enters heaven, they include the worshipers of false religions as worthy of heaven, which is clearly against the first commandment. They even believe you do not need to be baptized or believe that you need to turn to Jesus Christ to be saved. Lies are everywhere, people believe them because it is easier to believe. Following the true teachings of the Christianity is not easy, but the reward is eternal life in Heaven and being with our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.

It is a beautiful prayer, and the prayer does not negate the statement that God always forgives. The prayer does encompass two legitimate spiritualities, the view that God forgives conditionally, dependent on my own forgiveness, and the view that God forgives without condition.

God may love us unconditionally, but our relationship with God is conditional, and there are conditions, you said it your self, you said His forgiveness depends on your own forgiveness of others, this is a condition. Other conditions are whether you are truly sorry for your sins and will try not to sin again (a contrite heart), and whether you believe in the Son of God as your Lord and Savior, as it is the sacrifice of Jesus Christ that makes forgiveness possible, and restores our friendship with our Heavenly Father. I could think of more, but I think you can get the point.

God’s forgiveness is a constant, but to realize God’s complete forgiveness, we must forgive everyone we hold anything against. Again, this is a variation, not an imposed spirituality. Unconditional forgiveness is an invitation to a deeper realization.

I do agree with you that we must love our enemies and forgive them, as this is what Jesus taught, but to love them also means to pray for them when you know they are practicing a false religion, or worshiping false gods, or living a life of sin (like adulterers and homosexuals that are not living chaste lives, murders, thieves, etc.) It also means correcting them, when you know they are being led astray and living a life that will lead them to hell, even if they do not believe in hell, the Church teaches it exists, even if the new interpretation says it does not exist, we know from the past teachings it is real.

I hope I have been able to understand you and have understood you correctly this time, I think sometimes it is difficult to have these conversions on the internet, as it does make it a bit more confusing at times. We can try our best. I hope I am able to make myself clear to you.

 

[OneSheep]

Good Morning Francis,

I think you hit the mark in your answer.

In reply, let me first say that I was raised secular, and it really showed Forgiveness? A sign of weakness. I was a mess with anger and resentment. A friend suggested I pray for those with whom I was angry, so I did, not well, but I did it. After a few months, I realized my anger had been lifted and I handled negative things in my life much better (never always perfectly, tho!) I believed then and still do that God gave me a great gift in lifting that anger from me.

So in a way it may be hard for me to relate to your process. There have definitely been times when I heard about a terrible thing someone did and *knew *that but for the grace of God that could have been me. Other times I have to remind myself of that.

However… I think this is a personal thing. Something that one needs to do for oneself.

My concern about your broadening the scope to the point that you suggest that what would have gotten you to do something *is *what got others to do it concerns me.

Let’s take the example of a game. I play a computer game, and someone else might say I am playing badly because I ignore chances to score more points. They constantly try to help me by pointing these chances out.

What they do not understand is that I am trying to play the game using little tricks, like a musician plays scales, for practice. They go off and reflect that they themselves once played badly and have since improved just by being left alone, so I should too.

They think my motivation is the same as theirs, so they see a problem I do not see.

In attributing the motives you or I would have to the jihadis, you are able to forgive them more deeply, but, if you are incorrect in your assessment of *their *motives, you will respond to their actions incorrectly.

Yes, I agree that this would be a problem. Ironically, you are looking at what I am doing and saying you are concerned about the way I am doing it, which involves relating to my experience through your own experiences, which is exactly what the guy critiquing your gaming is doing. So you see, it is part of the human condition that we can only critique and empathize through our own experiences.

There is a lot of variation in how we take offense to another’s actions, which is all based on the formation of our conscience. Some people make a much bigger deal about particular actions, right? The variation breaks down, of course, when it comes to violence because violence triggers the strongest emotions when forming our consciences.

To get around this phenomenon, to some degree, I think the best we can do is to consider every single possibility we can imagine when trying to understand motive, and taking the steps to understand every one.

I’ll throw an example in an additional post.

And so I bring this back to our original topic (I did not mean to do this ).

The jihadis have stated their motives. Some who have studied Islam believe them. Others do not believe them. So, two groups of people, one who thinks as you do, one as I do.

The difference is that those people are in positions where they can and ought to make decisions about what should be done about the terrorists. Our stake (yours and mine) in the discussion is to be able to vote for those best able to reach effective decisions.

Reaching effective decisions involves knowing the enemy, in the sense of understanding them. Those who misunderstand will chose the wrong method of dealing with them, so this is important.

For example, off the top of my head I could suggest that our denial of the theological motive could be sending a message to ISIS that we are afraid of the prophecy’s being true and thus trying to avoid that particular battle in order to maintain our power. This will serve only to encourage them.

What Jesus does is call us to forgive, that it is the right way of dealing with anyone, right? And what else are we doing? We are protecting ourselves, and we are hitting targets that disable their ability to continue to do harm, if the harm is ongoing. If we are hitting targets to simply eliminate the state, then it is no longer “just war”.

For the peaceful Moslems, if I am right, taking this into account might change some aspects of how they present their religion to their children, or how they monitor their young people.

Peaceful Muslims would do well, in my opinion, to encourage their children to understand and forgive the people of “IS”. Demonizing is dangerous, because a young adult who is rebellious may happen to eventually encounter a person who claims allegiance to “IS” and who is an ordinary person just like you and I (they all are). The rebelliousness gets tied up with their parents “lying” to them about these “faithful” people who are “righteous”, and the kid ends up joining the state. If you add to this mix that these kids in Europe grow up in a culture where they are often seen as second-class citizens, they can really relate to the vitriolic attitude of those who follow “IS”; the idea of revenge is very alluring.

You can see how the same sort of demonizing can backfire concerning users of illegal drugs, right? The parents say “people who use the stuff are bad”, and a teenager trying to find his own identity separate from his parents encounters such a user as a normal person with normal motives. Next, the teen finds affiliation with the other involves drug use, and now you have a person who has joined a culture and is using.

While we are sitting here in our armchairs, what would you additionally suggest about ways that Muslim parents should present their own faith to their children?

 

[OneSheep]

Hi Francis,

For example, it is truly possible that a Muslim man could start with the tenet that Allah is merciful, and then turn around and spread terror. If I was insane, I could truly do this. Or I could start with the same tenet, and then get caught up with an ideology that involves world harmony through forcing everyone to be Muslim, that violent means justify the ends; if the whole world becomes part of the same in-group there will no longer be discord. It sounds logical and ideal, right?.

However, it shows a lack of awareness about human nature. Humans who force affiliation are doomed to failure. In addition, is it merciful to coerce people to be part of the in-group in the first place? If this is what is believed, they are not seeing the truth. Aren’t we all capable of believing untruths? Yes, we are born unaware.

Do you see what I am saying that a process of understanding looks like? If I said “they are believing an untruth, which is stupid and bad”, then I would be condemning rather than understanding. Understanding is a “standing among”, it is seeing what is happening within their context. Sorry if I sound like I am assuming this is not your approach also. I was applying what the priest told me, “It is not to condemn or condone, but understand.”

 

[OneSheep]

Hi Josie,

How is it not a sin? They must remain chaste, if they don’t (like those in the gay bar) they are living sinful lives.

Well, it may be “realistic” to assume people live sinful lives, but it is not charitable to do so, right?

You did not make that clear in your first posting. The words you used seemed confusing, or maybe I needed to read it again, as the comparison made no sense to me.

My apologies for lack of clarity. We can agree that people in a gay bar and a parish priest are all people loved by God.

I do not listened to talk radio, I read many Catholic books, I stay away from the newer Catholic books with opinions contrary to the teachings of the traditional Catholic Church. Many newer books have their own interpretation and are contrary to the truth. What is happening to the teachings is not a rewriting of them but a reinterpretation of them, and a spinning of what the teachings were originally mean to be. You can spin anything these days to make it mean what you want it to mean, but that does not make it true. You can call it being more open minded if you like, but it is really just a way of replacing the old.

Every “old tradition” was once new, Josie. The world changes and revelation unfolds. The constant we know is that the Spirit guides us. After all, “old traditions” sanctioned slavery, monetarily paying our way into heaven, and other such concepts that may have had their place at the time, but no longer do. (Remember, slavery itself was seen as the merciful alternative to simply slaughtering enemies, so the Church had to deal with that reality). There is really no security in written words; security is found in Love, in prayer, in the Spirit within.

To stay on the right path we need the guidance of the Holy Spirit and the love of Jesus Christ to know truth from lies. Many newer interpretations lead us to believe what is nice and easy to accept. They think hell is not real and that everyone enters heaven,

We do have from scripture that hell is real, and that our merciful God gives people the freedom to choose it. As far as someone saying everyone chooses to enter heaven, this is a pretty solid guess based on human nature, but no one knows that for sure. People have free will, so a choice against heaven remains a possibility.

they include the worshipers of false religions as worthy of heaven, which is clearly against the first commandment.They even believe you do not need to be baptized or believe that you need to turn to Jesus Christ to be saved

1260 "Since Christ died for all, and since all men are in fact called to one and the same destiny, which is divine, we must hold that the Holy Spirit offers to all the possibility of being made partakers, in a way known to God, of the Paschal mystery."63 Every man who is ignorant of the Gospel of Christ and of his Church, but seeks the truth and does the will of God in accordance with his understanding of it, can be saved. It may be supposed that such persons would have desired Baptism explicitly if they had known its necessity. .

Does the CCC present God as too compassionate and merciful Josie?

Lies are everywhere, people believe them because it is easier to believe. Following the true teachings of the Christianity is not easy, but the reward is eternal life in Heaven and being with our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.

For many people, it is much harder to believe that God would allow anyone from the out-group into heaven. “‘Those people’ couldn’t possibly go to heaven!” they say, right? This was common between Catholics and Protestants, it was an old “tradition”.

God may love us unconditionally, but our relationship with God is conditional, and there are conditions, you said it your self, you said His forgiveness depends on your own forgiveness of others, this is a condition.

Well, that is close, sort of. I meant that if a person believes in a conditionally loving God, he may see God’s forgiveness as conditional, which is a legitimate spirituality. I also said that if a person does not forgive everyone they hold something against, they will not realize the unconditional forgiveness of God. Like I said, the priest told us that God always forgives. If we are told that a million times, we still cannot realize such forgiveness (it will not be made real to the person) until they actually forgive everyone they hold something against. Believing in a God who loves and forgives unconditionally is also a legitimate spirituality.

Think of it this way. I have a beautiful ruby in a box; I show you the box. I tell you that the ruby is real and incredible to see. Do you believe me? Well, maybe, but you are not experiencing the beauty of the jewel. Such is God’s unconditional love and forgiveness. I can tell you it is there, but to truly experience it, one has to do it, then we can truly know what it means to love in this way. The greater realization stems from the doing. By doing, we open the box.

Other conditions are whether you are truly sorry for your sins and will try not to sin again (a contrite heart), and whether you believe in the Son of God as your Lord and Savior, as it is the sacrifice of Jesus Christ that makes forgiveness possible, and restores our friendship with our Heavenly Father. I could think of more, but I think you can get the point.

These are conditions of reconciliation, which in part involve our own stepping forth. God, however, has already stepped forth. He is always waiting for us with an outstretched hand! This is the prodigal son’s Father.

(continued)

 

[OneSheep]

JosieN:

I do agree with you that we must love our enemies and forgive them, as this is what Jesus taught, but to love them also means to pray for them when you know they are practicing a false religion, or worshiping false gods, or living a life of sin (like adulterers and homosexuals that are not living chaste lives, murders, thieves, etc.) It also means correcting them, when you know they are being led astray and living a life that will lead them to hell…

Yes, I agree with all of the above.

I hope I have been able to understand you and have understood you correctly this time, I think sometimes it is difficult to have these conversions on the internet, as it does make it a bit more confusing at times. We can try our best. I hope I am able to make myself clear to you.

Well, people say that the majority of communication happens non-verbally, so the written forum has its limits, doesn’t it? If I find myself assuming that a person is angry or resentful, I check myself.

On the previous post, if people are going to believe in Islam, wouldn’t we rather give voice to those who say that Allah condemns no one and forgives everyone? That way, no Muslim might feel compelled to kill or punish, nor could they see the life of an “infidel” as being of no value.

But this is not a “manufacture” of God’s attributes so that we on a small planet can learn to get along. This is a God who is true to those of us who find Him this way through life experience and prayer. All of us can know God in this way.

Blessings!

 

[simpleas]

I’m I reading this right, people who live in sin (old fashioned term that means to me, living together before marriage, either straight gay or whatever) are your enemies??

 

[OneSheep]

I’m I reading this right, people who live in sin (old fashioned term that means to me, living together before marriage, either straight gay or whatever) are your enemies??

Hi Simpleas!

To some people, they are “enemies”, or at least they are resented like enemies, right? This is information taken from the article that an “IS” guy wrote in Dabiq magazine. He saw the murders at the Pulse club as taking revenge for Islam. His resentment blinds him.

BTW, I see that they finally convicted that Choudary guy over there. I saw an interview of him on our “60 minutes”; he was so incredibly rude to the female interviewer. His mind is totally warped, he has no idea what he is doing.

The conviction of Choudary should be a wake up call for those in America who choose to give voice to anger without remembering to forgive and be charitable to those disagreed with!

Nice to hear from you. I thought of seeking you out, but I’ve been pretty busy lately.

 

[OneSheep]

I’m I reading this right, people who live in sin (old fashioned term that means to me, living together before marriage, either straight gay or whatever) are your enemies??

When Josie said “enemies” she was not referring to people who live sinful lives but are not hostile to us. She was saying we should pray for all of them. She was not saying that sinners are enemies.

I had to look again to see why you asked the question. Yours was an easy reading to make; it was a miscommunication.

Thanks for the correction!

 

[simpleas]

When Josie said “enemies” she was not referring to people who live sinful lives but are not hostile to us. She was saying we should pray for all of them. She was not saying that sinners are enemies.

I had to look again to see why you asked the question. Yours was an easy reading to make; it was a miscommunication.

Thanks for the correction!

This from 518 :

I do agree with you that we must love our enemies and forgive them, as this is what Jesus taught, but to love them also means to pray for them when you know they are practicing a false religion, or worshiping false gods, or living a life of sin (like adulterers and homosexuals that are not living chaste lives,

To which you also agreed is what is confusing. Sounds like the described are enemies to me.

Your hostile comment is a tad confusing, are you saying people living in sin who don’t agree with your view are your enemy? The others that aren’t hostile but live in sin aren’t your enemy?

And I’m referring to the individual person not a group.

Thanks.

 

[JosieN]

Blessings!

Well, it may be “realistic” to assume people live sinful lives, but it is not charitable to do so, right?

It may not seem nice to point out someone’s sins, and it is easier to say nothing, but it is not charitable not to correct them either, if what they are doing will cause them the loss of their soul. My concern is that being charitable to wrong behaviors will not lead them to heaven, a correction is needed. Also our prayers and sacrifices for sinners are necessary to lead people on the right path.

Every “old tradition” was once new, Josie. The world changes and revelation unfolds.

(Remember, slavery itself was seen as the merciful alternative to simply slaughtering enemies, so the Church had to deal with that reality). There is really no security in written words; security is found in Love, in prayer, in the Spirit within

If everyone followed their spirit within, there would be no conformity in our beliefs. That which is true to one person could be a lie to another person. One person’s spirit within will say to them that homosexuality is a sin, another will not. There is also the concern about false spirits. These spirits use deceptions and can make anything seem acceptable in our eyes, but not in the eyes of God. So this is dangerous. We need the word of God as it is written in the Bible to guide us. We need a prayer life also, but without the written word, we could soon become lost in our own interpretations. We must never believe we are above God’s own words.

Slavery and other old traditions you speak of are no longer acceptable, but this is not a good comparison. In many cultures slaves we treated like family and others they were not, I do not see what this has to do with our discussion anyway. It was never an old tradition just a way of life back then.

We do have from scripture that hell is real, and that our merciful God gives people the freedom to choose it. As far as someone saying everyone chooses to enter heaven, this is a pretty solid guess based on human nature, but no one knows that for sure. People have free will, so a choice against heaven remains a possibility

I suppose there those who choose hell over going to heaven, by choosing a sinful life, this is part of having a free will. We choose our own path. There is always hope for them also and I believe these are the individuals need who need our prayers the most. They need to know that it is through the Blood and Sacrifice of Jesus Christ that our sins are washed away and that they only need to ask Him for forgiveness. Those of us who know Jesus Christ and know the truth, as it is written, must help them in a kind and loving way to find God and His forgiveness. Jesus is real, and they need to know the truth because hell is also real.

1260 - Does the CCC present God as too compassionate and merciful Josie?

This quote from the Catholic Catechism is for those who are seeking the truth as taught by Jesus Christ in the Gospel. Are Muslim fighters seeking this truth? They are seeking vengeance, I believe you agreed with this earlier. Your said they are resentful and their actions are motivated by revenge.

I believe God is compassionate and merciful, but my understanding is that it is not our place to say what God will or will not do, or how who He will forgive and not forgive, where you say you know God forgives everyone unconditionally. That is where we find a difference in our opinion.

For many people, it is much harder to believe that God would allow anyone from the out-group into heaven. “‘Those people’ couldn’t possibly go to heaven!” they say, right? This was common between Catholics and Protestants, it was an old “tradition”.

We know nothing of who will and will not enter heaven. The old Catholic teaching and traditions gave us the path to salvation because through them we are taught to be obedient to God’s Laws. If the word of God in the Bible calls it a sin, that is what it was and still is. We are taught to follow God’s will for us. We are taught to believe in Jesus Christ as our Lord and Savior, and that He is the judge of our sins. If they are from what you call the “out-group” it is not our place to assume they will be saved, or not be saved, we are not the judge and we did not make the laws.

Do you see what I am saying that a process of understanding looks like? If I said “they are believing an untruth, which is stupid and bad”, then I would be condemning rather than understanding. Understanding is a “standing among”, it is seeing what is happening within their context. Sorry if I sound like I am assuming this is not your approach also. I was applying what the priest told me, “It is not to condemn or condone, but understand.”

I have nothing against understanding, what concerns me is the blindness with which one understands. There is so much more to understand, than you or I will ever comprehend, making ourselves out to be worthy to understand, is more than what we really are, and is a sin of pride. My approach is to pray for their souls, and then leave it in God’s Hands. Correct sinners, but be kind and loving when you do. Leave mercy to God, as he is worthy to give it, we are not, as he alone understands the heart of a person.

My reply is getting very long. I would like to leave you with this video link, and if you are interested, you could watch it. it demonstrates to me the power of prayer. This man’s soul was saved because of his mother’s prayers for him. It is a long video, but worth watching.

youtube.com/watch?v=fzvjKubI-04

 

[JosieN]

This from 518 :

To which you also agreed is what is confusing. Sounds like the described are enemies to me.

Your hostile comment is a tad confusing, are you saying people living in sin who don’t agree with your view are your enemy? The others that aren’t hostile but live in sin aren’t your enemy?

And I’m referring to the individual person not a group.

Thanks.

Sorry for the confusion. An enemy is a person who hates another and wishes to injure him. The discussion was about why the Muslim terrorist would kill an innocent priest. One Sheep says that Christianity is an affront to these people and that is why they killed him and this is the same reason the Muslim man killed the homosexuals in the bar, because they are both affronts to Muslims and their religion. My point was that we need to pray for people who hate others, or who kill and commit sins that offend God. All sinners need our prayers. I hope this helps.

 

[St_Francis]

Good Morning Francis,

Yes, I agree that this would be a problem. Ironically, you are looking at what I am doing and saying you are concerned about the way I am doing it, which involves relating to my experience through your own experiences, which is exactly what the guy critiquing your gaming is doing. So you see, it is part of the human condition that we can only critique and empathize through our own experiences.

I don’t think that is necessarily true. I think we can learn from the experience of others, for example, through literature and learning about other people and cultures. It seems important to open our minds in that way.

There is a lot of variation in how we take offense to another’s actions, which is all based on the formation of our conscience. Some people make a much bigger deal about particular actions, right? The variation breaks down, of course, when it comes to violence because violence triggers the strongest emotions when forming our consciences.

Very true.Sometimes people are unreasonably offended, other times people are offended for reasons which are beyond us or not within our thinking.

To get around this phenomenon, to some degree, I think the best we can do is to consider every single possibility we can imagine when trying to understand motive, and taking the steps to understand every one.

This seems like a rather long process to go through each time one needs to forgive, doesn’t it?

Maybe a separation between the personal sphere and the public square would help. Privately, each person takes care of their own forgiveness and public policy can proceed on moral lines regardless of the personal situations of those involved.

I’ll throw an example in an additional post.

Thanks!

What Jesus does is call us to forgive, that it is the right way of dealing with anyone, right?

We are told to pray that God will forgive our trespasses as we forgive others.

But Christ does not seem to have dealt with other solely by forgiving them. Christ instructed, admonished, vituperated, and threw over the moneychangers’ tables.

And as far as I can tell, God requires repentance for His forgiveness to be extended to us: those guilty of mortal sin remain in their soul-dead state until they ask for forgiveness.

And what else are we doing? We are protecting ourselves, and we are hitting targets that disable their ability to continue to do harm, if the harm is ongoing. If we are hitting targets to simply eliminate the state, then it is no longer “just war”.

I think understanding their motivations could lead to a much more effective plan of fighting them than we would have getting their motivations wrong.

Peaceful Muslims would do well, in my opinion, to encourage their children to understand and forgive the people of “IS”.

As a parent (and I’m not saying you are not a parent), I would teach my children to forgive anyone who acts against them. I would also teach them not to need to forgive people who have not done anything to them.

I would certainly not teach my children to dwell on the motivations and thought processes of hideous thugs: that seems like it would be unhealthy for them.

Demonizing is dangerous, because a young adult who is rebellious may happen to eventually encounter a person who claims allegiance to “IS” and who is an ordinary person just like you and I (they all are). The rebelliousness gets tied up with their parents “lying” to them about these “faithful” people who are “righteous”, and the kid ends up joining the state. If you add to this mix that these kids in Europe grow up in a culture where they are often seen as second-class citizens, they can really relate to the vitriolic attitude of those who follow “IS”; the idea of revenge is very alluring.

You can see how the same sort of demonizing can backfire concerning users of illegal drugs, right? The parents say “people who use the stuff are bad”, and a teenager trying to find his own identity separate from his parents encounters such a user as a normal person with normal motives. Next, the teen finds affiliation with the other involves drug use, and now you have a person who has joined a culture and is using.

You do realize that there are options other than demonizing or denial?

While we are sitting here in our armchairs, what would you additionally suggest about ways that Muslim parents should present their own faith to their children?

Does the wink mean this is not a serious question?

 

[St_Francis]

Hi Francis,

For example, it is truly possible that a Muslim man could start with the tenet that Allah is merciful, and then turn around and spread terror. If I was insane, I could truly do this. Or I could start with the same tenet, and then get caught up with an ideology that involves world harmony through forcing everyone to be Muslim, that violent means justify the ends; if the whole world becomes part of the same in-group there will no longer be discord. It sounds logical and ideal, right?.

However, it shows a lack of awareness about human nature. Humans who force affiliation are doomed to failure. In addition, is it merciful to coerce people to be part of the in-group in the first place? If this is what is believed, they are not seeing the truth. Aren’t we all capable of believing untruths? Yes, we are born unaware.

Do you see what I am saying that a process of understanding looks like? If I said “they are believing an untruth, which is stupid and bad”, then I would be condemning rather than understanding. Understanding is a “standing among”, it is seeing what is happening within their context. Sorry if I sound like I am assuming this is not your approach also. I was applying what the priest told me, “It is not to condemn or condone, but understand.”

OK, now suppose there are people who are forcing everyone to submit to Islam (The people of the Book do not have to convert, they can pay extra taxes with a submissive attitude instead.) being caught up in the ideology you describe.

And imagine that forces are opposed to this violent movement, and they say, well, these folks are just upset that they have suffered injustice so they are rightfully angry. Let’s give them land and control to make up for the injustice and publicize reconciliation committees for when they stop fighting.

If the fighters are truly upset about the injustices, then they will stop fighting.2

*But if they are not *upset about injustice, but simply believing that they are doing what they think is right, then they will not stop fighting, but they might be persuaded by reason into changing their minds…

… unless they believe it is a mandate for them to fight, a mandate from Allah, and if furthermore they believe that they will attain a paradise if they die in battle, then the opposers need to sort out and convince them from their own religious teachings, or convert them altogether.

And this is why it is important to understand that Islam does in fact teach violence.

Because what needs to happen is not a lot of deeply understanding forgiveness on the part of people to whom they have done nothing, nor in fact from those they have actually injured. Under their theology, forgiveness from their enemies is meaningless.

So it is necessary to investigate those aspects of Islam from which they draw their “ideology,” and work from there, not ignore the violent teachings in Islam.

I was applying what the priest told me, “It is not to condemn or condone, but understand.”

I also need to add that the counsel of a priest is for the counseled person himself, and maybe that only for a temporary period of time. It’s like medicine: what works for one person may be the exact opposite from what the next person needs. (Here I am not speaking of forgiveness, but of understanding before or alongside forgiving.)

 

[anon67074017]

Islamists are not just attacking secular society in the West. They are now targeting the Christian heritage of Europe.

 

[OneSheep]

This from 518 :

To which you also agreed is what is confusing. Sounds like the described are enemies to me.

Your hostile comment is a tad confusing, are you saying people living in sin who don’t agree with your view are your enemy? The others that aren’t hostile but live in sin aren’t your enemy?

And I’m referring to the individual person not a group.

Thanks.

I think Josie cleared it up, right?

What can I say… anyone who disagrees with me is simply stupid and is definitely my arch-enemy, after all, I am the mighty OneSheep, and all should bow down before me.
Baaaa.

nah. maybe not.

God bless, Simpleas. Have great morning!

 

[OneSheep]

Hi Josie,

If everyone followed their spirit within, there would be no conformity in our beliefs. That which is true to one person could be a lie to another person. One person’s spirit within will say to them that homosexuality is a sin, another will not.

Good point, we need to check what our conscience says against what the Church says. There are deeper truths than what the conscience says, though. Love is deeper, and transcends the conscience.

There is also the concern about false spirits. These spirits use deceptions and can make anything seem acceptable in our eyes, but not in the eyes of God. So this is dangerous. We need the word of God as it is written in the Bible to guide us. We need a prayer life also, but without the written word, we could soon become lost in our own interpretations. We must never believe we are above God’s own words

.

Another good point, but the written word is read with the eyes of experience, it is subject to the “phenomenology” of the reader. We read things based on our own formed vocabularies. There is no escape from a measure of subjectivity. Love, however, has a way of finding the way through it all.

Slavery and other old traditions you speak of are no longer acceptable, but this is not a good comparison. In many cultures slaves we treated like family and others they were not, I do not see what this has to do with our discussion anyway. It was never an old tradition just a way of life back then.

It looks like Popes did not begin speaking against it until about 1435. Not in a doctrinal sense until the 19th or 20th century.

I suppose there those who choose hell over going to heaven, by choosing a sinful life, this is part of having a free will. We choose our own path. There is always hope for them also and I believe these are the individuals need who need our prayers the most. They need to know that it is through the Blood and Sacrifice of Jesus Christ that our sins are washed away and that they only need to ask Him for forgiveness. Those of us who know Jesus Christ and know the truth, as it is written, must help them in a kind and loving way to find God and His forgiveness. Jesus is real, and they need to know the truth because hell is also real.

Yes.

This quote from the Catholic Catechism is for those who are seeking the truth as taught by Jesus Christ in the Gospel. Are Muslim fighters seeking this truth? They are seeking vengeance, I believe you agreed with this earlier. Your said they are resentful and their actions are motivated by revenge.

I believe God is compassionate and merciful, but my understanding is that it is not our place to say what God will or will not do, or how who He will forgive and not forgive, where you say you know God forgives everyone unconditionally. That is where we find a difference in our opinion.

We can know that God is love, that love is unconditional, and forgiveness is an act of love. Therefore, forgiveness is unconditional. When Pope Francis says, “God always forgives us” he is speaking from what he knows of God, a singularity that loves. It is not our “place” to doubt God’s love, right? We can safely err on the side of mercy.

But yes, when a person is seeking revenge, they are hardly on the path of seeking truth.

We know nothing of who will and will not enter heaven. The old Catholic teaching and traditions gave us the path to salvation because through them we are taught to be obedient to God’s Laws. If the word of God in the Bible calls it a sin, that is what it was and still is. We are taught to follow God’s will for us. We are taught to believe in Jesus Christ as our Lord and Savior, and that He is the judge of our sins. If they are from what you call the “out-group” it is not our place to assume they will be saved, or not be saved, we are not the judge and we did not make the laws.

None of what you said there is contrary to the CCC, it is not contrary to “new” teachings. And you are right, we cannot assume that people will choose heaven; they certainly choose plenty of hell on Earth. The difference is, though, that we can be certain that a merciful God would never let a person choose hell without the person knowing exactly what they are doing. Bishop Barron says something like, “God could make heaven look like an ice cream bar for a person who loves ice cream”. I’m paraphrasing, but we have to keep in mind that God wants all of us with Him, and he has the power to make the choice very clear!

I have nothing against understanding, what concerns me is the blindness with which one understands. There is so much more to understand, than you or I will ever comprehend, making ourselves out to be worthy to understand, is more than what we really are, and is a sin of pride. My approach is to pray for their souls, and then leave it in God’s Hands. Correct sinners, but be kind and loving when you do. Leave mercy to God, as he is worthy to give it, we are not, as he alone understands the heart of a person.

We are not worthy to understand? That’s a new one, not traditional.
We are strictly commanded not to “leave mercy to God” Josie. We are called to practice all the works of mercy.
Yes, He alone understands what is truly in a person’s heart, but He can also show us. To deny that the Spirit does this goes against the Spirit. Understanding is one of the gifts of the Spirit.

Thanks for responding. It seems like we may be revisiting previous points.,

Blessings!

I will look at the video in the morning.

 

[simpleas]

Sorry for the confusion. An enemy is a person who hates another and wishes to injure him. The discussion was about why the Muslim terrorist would kill an innocent priest. One Sheep says that Christianity is an affront to these people and that is why they killed him and this is the same reason the Muslim man killed the homosexuals in the bar, because they are both affronts to Muslims and their religion. My point was that we need to pray for people who hate others, or who kill and commit sins that offend God. All sinners need our prayers. I hope this helps.

Ok cool, so you don’t see people who live in sin as your enemy.

Thanks.

 

[simpleas]

I think Josie cleared it up, right?

What can I say… anyone who disagrees with me is simply stupid and is definitely my arch-enemy, after all, I am the mighty OneSheep, and all should bow down before me.
Baaaa.

nah. maybe not.

God bless, Simpleas. Have great morning!

You might not be the mighty Onesheep, but you do wish others would see your own point of view on certain matters, as we all do.
Ours is a faith that is now built on peace and love of others, wasn’t always that way.

There will always be damaged people who kill for reasons they believe to be correct.
I read reports about the murders of the people at the bar, that the murders were due to his own self hate at being gay rather than a religious intent.
The priest’s murder is totally different, in that it was aimed at Catholicism.

Yes it has been cleared up for me, when I read comments that confuse me I’d rather ask than think what I read is not of Catholicism.

Have a good day too.

 

[St_Francis]

You might not be the mighty Onesheep, but you do wish others would see your own point of view on certain matters, as we all do.
Ours is a faith that is now built on peace and love of others, wasn’t always that way.

There will always be damaged people who kill for reasons they believe to be correct.
I read reports about the murders of the people at the bar, that the murders were due to his own self hate at being gay rather than a religious intent.

Just FYI: The killer was thought to be homosexual according to early reports, which were later proven to be incorrect, possibly due to a misidentification.

The priest’s murder is totally different, in that it was aimed at Catholicism.

Yes it has been cleared up for me, when I read comments that confuse me I’d rather ask than think what I read is not of Catholicism.

Have a good day too.

 

[simpleas]

Just FYI: The killer was thought to be homosexual according to early reports, which were later proven to be incorrect, possibly due to a misidentification.

I have a hard time believing most media reports…