Hello, A Satanist has joined you

[JMJ_coder]

Yes, and we also shouldn’t insult people who do choose to worship Satan. We should respect each other and the choices we make. You can’t ask people to respect your religion and beliefs while not reciprocating.

It would be an insult to let someone continue in gross error. It would be an insult to be dishonest and confirm their error and sin.

We respect every person, they are created in the image and likeness of God. But we do not respect the sins that are killing them. Sin is a type of spiritual cancer. In the physical world, we love a person with cancer, but we hate the cancer and certainly don’t respect the cancer. The same in the spiritual world - we love and respect everyone, but we don’t love, respect, or tolerate that which is slowly killing them.

 

[JMJ_coder]

I don’t if Satan exists, but if he does, we should love him just as God loves him. We should in our love, have sweet affection for him. When someone is ill, our love should be all the more tender; this goes for both physical illness as well as spiritual illness.

Time for another Father Corapi quote:

Do I pity the devil…probably not; do I hate the devil…probably not; do I love the devil…HECK NO!! But, but, Scripture tells us to love our enemies…not that one.

The devil isn’t ill - the devil and his demons are irrevocably and eternally dead. And they want to drag you down to their level.

 

[bbarrick8383]

I guess JMJ has a friendlier way of saying what I was trying to say.

My immense hatred for the sins that people commit often takes over my ability to show the emotions properly.

But, while I’m still agitated. You brought up another bunch I’d like to add to my list. Sexual Predators. Ignored.

 

[jfhh]

So if a Satanist needs a consecrated Host to desecrate in a black mass to pursue what he believes is happiness, we have an obligation to provide such?

Um no. You shouldn’t interfere with them. You aren’t obliged to facilitate them. If they already have consecrated hosts, legally obtained, then you shouldn’t interefere with what they do with them as long as what they do is legal and doesn’t interfere with what anyone else is doing. But you aren’t obliged to honor their requests to provide them with any.

Your prejudice in associating Satanists with host desecration is no different than associating Jews with host desecration. A minority may do so or have done so just as a minority of Muslims may be terrorists. But most Satanists are not anxious to desecrate hosts. Besides, most Satanists wouldn’t believe it would be possible from what I understand since they don’t think the hosts are actually Jesus or holy in the first place. Satanists who thus desecrate hosts would be no different than some misguided people in Italy having sex in a church. That church had to be reconsecrated because of that, but the couple apologized and it was no big deal. But when Satanists are involved it becomes a big deal because let’s admit it, there is hatred in the hearts of many for Satanists. Maybe you have nothing but pure love for them, but then you probably also know many are not pure white when it comes to Satanists.

Let me ask, would you - perhaps as a parent - have a problem with someone the state has labeled a sexual predator living in your neighborhood?

Sexual predators are by definition people who prey on other people, people who tend to harm other people without their consent. Satanists, homosexuals, and pro-choicers do not harm other people and should not be cast in the same lot as sexual predators.

The equating of the recognition of active homosexuality as gravely disordered morally and homophobia is a blatant falsehood.

I never said believing gay sex is evil is being homophobic. I said not wanting homosexuals in your neighborhood, not wanting a homosexual President, etc., is homophobic. If you thought active homosexuals were more wicked than you, then I would think you were prejudiced. But you thinking their conduct is evil is just fine by me. Some think eating meat is evil and for that reason are vegans. Some of these same vegans are strippers. Some people think stripping is evil. All of this is fine by me even though I disagree with all of it.

 

[bbarrick8383]

If you thought active homosexuals were more wicked than you, then I would think you were prejudiced. But you thinking their conduct is evil is just fine by me. Some think eating meat is evil and for that reason are vegans. Some of these same vegans are strippers. Some people think stripping is evil. All of this is fine by me even though I disagree with all of it.

They are more wicked than me. I’m a sinner, but I know my sins will be forgiven when asked. And I know that I am faithful to my wife in every sense of the word. I know that I try to lead a good Christian life. So yes, I think their conduct is evil, wicked whatever you want to call it.

Thank you, I do not want strippers in my neighborhood either.

 

[LilyM]

Um no. You shouldn’t interfere with them. You aren’t obliged to facilitate them. If they already have consecrated hosts, legally obtained, then you shouldn’t interefere with what they do with them as long as what they do is legal and doesn’t interfere with what anyone else is doing. But you aren’t obliged to honor their requests to provide them with any.

I don’t know how much you know about Catholicism, but we believe that the Eucharist (consecrated hosts) literally is Jesus - He is really and physically present under the appearance of bread and wine. What is done to it is literally done to Him in a very real sense.

Allowing the Eucharist to be desecrated would be the most heinous sin of sacrilege - totally contrary to everything that our faith stands for. As bad as anything done by those who physically nailed Him to the Cross, because they at least didn’t know He was God, whereas we do.

Catholic saints have died rather than permit sacrilege to the Eucharist (St Tarcisius being the best known example), so strong is this belief.

And of course we’re obliged to prevent sacrilege if we can! If anyone had known beforehand that that couple were going to desecrate the church by having sex inside it would’ve been their bounden duty to prevent it.

By divine command and law we are to prevent, if possible, the sins and sacrilege of others, just as by law we are wherever possible to prevent their crimes. You couldn’t sit by and give someone a knife knowing full well that they were going to kill someone with it and pretend innocence or that you were doing the right thing - you’d be charged with complicity in the crime alongside them.

 

[jfhh]

Time for another Father Corapi quote:

Do I pity the devil…probably not; do I hate the devil…probably not; do I love the devil…HECK NO!! But, but, Scripture tells us to love our enemies…not that one.

The devil isn’t ill - the devil and his demons are irrevocably and eternally dead. And they want to drag you down to their level.

I’d take your cue from Jesus rather than Corapi. Jesus did pity the devils. When the crowds acted otherwise, Jesus alone showed compassion and heeded the devils pleas to allow them to possess some pigs instead of being sent to the torture of the “Abyss.”

No mortal understands the Sacred Heart of Jesus. Theologians say the Sacred (Human) Heart of Jesus possesses a finite degree of sanctifying grace (it’s not possible for sanctifying grace to be infinite). So the Divine Nature is even more unfathomable. Jesus is like an icon (this is now my own maybe unorthodox thought), through which God shines.

The promises of God are irrevocable and the OT says that even if all abandon someone, even a mother her child, that the son of God will never be forgotten by God – period. The angels, including the fallen ones (cf. Genesis) are described as the “sons of God”. Thus they too fall under that promise that they will never be forgotten by God. This is obviously more than just saying God is omniscient or has a good memory. This is a spiritual mystery we need not try to figure out. We just need to love without exception. Jesus didn’t say “Love your enemies except Satan”; he said “Love your enemies”. No ifs ands or buts.

 

[cowgirl89]

so, question for those claiming to practice any branch of “satanism”. do u hold yourselves to any form of “morals” i mean is everything a subjective choice for you? are you just supposed to do whatever makes u feel best? if you are practicing “self-worship”, than if you were to do something purely for the benefit of someone else and actually cause inconveniece to yourself, is that considered wrong(to you)? it just seems to me like what most of you are claiming to believe/practice is quite vague and subjective and not a real religeon or philosophy at all- or at least what most of you are saying you believe doesn’t really fit perfectly into what the “religeon” you claim to be a part of teaches u should believe…granted, i pretty ignorant of non-christian religeons so forgive me if that seems way off the wall…one of the things i like about calling myself a Catholic Christian is that i have a standard that i know i’m supposed to follow- though i may not always succeed, it is there for me to look to and strive for. something to live for. i guess not everyone feels the need for that

 

[jfhh]

Good heavens - those satanists are literally desecrating JESUS, really present in the Eucharist, and you think we shouldn’t interfere?

Persuading them peacefully is fine. Interfering by badgering, harassing or doing violent things is not fine. I’m sure it’s only a tiny tiny minority that do that anyway. Maybe 0.001% or less. I know Jesus is present in the Eucharist (I am not an orthodox Catholic btw; I am trying to be more orthodox if I can though). I don’t believe in transubstantiation. I prefer Fr. Karl Rahner, S.J.,‘s theory of transfinalization. That doesn’t make it OK to not respect the religious values of Catholics of course. But we shouldn’t return evil for evil. How did Jesus respond when Jesus’ actual body was about to be more than desecrated, violated in the Passion? When Peter tried to rescue Jesus with violence, Jesus rebuked Peter and healed the person he attacked. Let’s follow Jesus, not Peter. Jesus is probably the person who most effectively was able to reach the Jewish goal of union with God, embodying God in his body and life and word: the word of God, Jesus.

 

[LilyM]

Persuading them peacefully is fine. Interfering by badgering, harassing or doing violent things is not fine. I’m sure it’s only a tiny tiny minority that do that anyway. Maybe 0.001% or less. I know Jesus is present in the Eucharist (I am not an orthodox Catholic btw; I am trying to be more orthodox if I can though). I don’t believe in transubstantiation. I prefer Fr. Karl Rahner, S.J.,‘s theory of transfinalization. That doesn’t make it OK to not respect the religious values of Catholics of course. But we shouldn’t return evil for evil. How did Jesus respond when Jesus’ actual body was about to be more than desecrated, violated in the Passion? When Peter tried to rescue Jesus with violence, Jesus rebuked Peter and healed the person he attacked. Let’s follow Jesus, not Peter. Jesus is probably the person who most effectively was able to reach the Jewish goal of union with God, embodying God in his body and life and word: the word of God, Jesus.

I re-edited my post. Go back and read it.

The Apostles treated Jesus’ body with the greatest possible respect once His hour of self-willed sacrifice was done. They mourned over it, buried it with honour and dignity, and the women went back on Sunday to do more honour to it. We can do no less to His presence in the Eucharist than treat it with utmost respect and never allow ANYONE to disrespect it.

We can no more sit idly by and permit people to sin than we can idly sit by and permit them to commit crimes. It’s our duty to try to stop crime when we know it’s going to happen, likewise it is our duty to try to stop people committing sin if we can. Otherwise we’re complicit in it.

 

[bbarrick8383]

Well, personally I find it a little ironic that you come after me because I do not want these people in my neighborhood.

I’m curious, what do you think about the recent Prop 8 protest where the Cross was taken from the old lady and stomped on?

What if these were Satanist doing the same thing?

Most Satanist know they must keep their practice behind closed doors if they want to be accepted at work or by their neighbors or other social functions.

Might as well add another group to my list, those that burn crosses, the kkk and others of the like. To me, burning a cross is very offensive and had one been taken out of my hands and stomped…well lets just hope that Jesus would help me in that moment to do the right thing.

 

[jfhh]

They are more wicked than me.

Wow. So you are holier than all the active homosexuals in the world.

Thank you, I do not want strippers in my neighborhood either.

You know I was talking about the individuals right? Let me let you in on something. Strippers are often ordinary women. They are college students or graduate students paying tuition or wanting to make better money. They are single mothers with children. They deserve our love and respect.

Many sex workers (which does not necessarily mean prostitutes) are actually highly educated women. CNBC recently had a special report called “Dirty Money” which focused on the business of “high end” escorts. The special report revealed that contrary to popular belief many in this segment of the sex worker industry have college degrees, even graduate degrees or are in graduate school. Many of the high-end customers prefer these highly educated women for reasons in the report. So if you live in a rich neighborhood and one of your neighbors has a masters degree and is working a PhD, according to CNBC, she could very well be a high end escort.

Of course some have problems you don’t want in your neighborhood. Drug abuse is one problem seen amongst sex workers, including strippers. But let’s not be prejudiced against anyone, including strippers or any other sex worker. I know Satanists and sex workers are the least respected and most outcast in society, but these were exactly the kinds of people JESUS associated himself with.

Jesus dined with prostitutes and was a guest in their homes. Yet you would not even want a stripper in your neighborhood much less in your home or you in theirs.

I am afraid to find out how far this prejudice goes. Are you against homeless people in your neighborhood too? To be fair, most Americans probably are. It’s the whole NIMBY thing. But we know it is wrong.

 

[RubyT]

…

With all due respect, :ehh: I think you might want to get that checked out.

Actually I did get it checked out with my priest. We tested the spirits and they checked out. With all due respect, perhaps your way of thinking is somewhat close minded.

 

[JMJ_coder]

Um no. You shouldn’t interfere with them. You aren’t obliged to facilitate them. If they already have consecrated hosts, legally obtained, then you shouldn’t interefere with what they do with them as long as what they do is legal and doesn’t interfere with what anyone else is doing. But you aren’t obliged to honor their requests to provide them with any.

There is no legal way to obtain a consecrated Host - the Church doesn’t offer them to others for sale or for any purpose other than participation in the Sacrament of the Eucharist.

Any consecrated Hosts for sale on sites like ebay (if they are in fact real and not just an unconsecrated host that someone is lying about) - then they did not obtain it legally - it is stolen goods.

And you better believe that I’d do anything in my powers to prevent desecration to the host up to and including (with the grace of God) offering my life.

Your prejudice in associating Satanists with host desecration is no different than associating Jews with host desecration.

There were a handful of Jews who might have done such things in the past, not part of their religion though. You do know what a black mass is - which is part of the satanic rituals. Satanists look to the master deceiver as their role model, so I don’t believe a word that comes out of their mouths. An example, if you were on a jury, would you find a witness credible who looked up to as a role model and emulated in their actions a perjurer? Opposition to Christ and desecration of Him is part of their religion. They have Satan’s agenda as their own, and it is dark indeed.

Sexual predators are by definition people who prey on other people, people who tend to harm other people without their consent. Satanists, homosexuals, and pro-choicers do not harm other people and should not be cast in the same lot as sexual predators.

Satanists are opposed against Goodness, Truth, Beauty and Life - as they worship the opposite and enemy of God Who is Goodness, Truth, Beauty, and Life.

Homosexuals rip apart at the very foundation of society - the family based upon marriage between one man and one woman.

Pro-choicers advocate murdering the most innocent, babes in their own mothers womb.

Their actions are harmful to others.

 

[JMJ_coder]

Wow. So you are holier than all the active homosexuals in the world.

Well, I’d assume that he isn’t living in mortal sin. All the active homosexuals in the world are - a very wicked state indeed.

 

[bbarrick8383]

Wow. So you are holier than all the active homosexuals in the world.

No, I’d have to give props to those who believe they are homosexual but who have never slept with the same sex. And remain so because of their religious beliefs. I highly respect them and doubt that I would know whether or not they were homosexual.

I do not want any strippers or prostitutes in my neighborhood, male, female, college educated, drug problem I personally do not care.

Jesus dined with prostitutes and was a guest in their homes. Yet you would not even want a stripper in your neighborhood much less in your home or you in theirs.

I am afraid to find out how far this prejudice goes. Are you against homeless people in your neighborhood too? To be fair, most Americans probably are. It’s the whole NIMBY thing. But we know it is wrong.

I have a wife and children, no I do not want anyone on my list in my home. And, if I want to keep my wife and children, no I do not want to go to theirs. The common sense in that answer is ridiculous.

A homeless guy in my neighborhood, well I’ll be more than happy to tell you how I would handle that. First, I’d make conversation with the guy, you know find out more about him/her. Find his name out and have my sheriff check him out and make sure he’s not wanted. If he’s an all around decent guy down on his luck I’d find a way to help him out the best I could. Another common sense answer.

I’m not a prejudice bigot like the homosexuals were calling the mormons in California that you are trying to make me out to be. Just a normal traditional Dad, protecting and defending his household from pure evil.

[/QUOTE]

 

[JMJ_coder]

I’d take your cue from Jesus rather than Corapi. Jesus did pity the devils. When the crowds acted otherwise, Jesus alone showed compassion and heeded the devils pleas to allow them to possess some pigs instead of being sent to the torture of the “Abyss.”

Jesus didn’t heed the demons as if yielding to them or having compassion on them. He did what he did to teach the people - among other things - the absolute evil of the demons. See Saint John Chrysostom’s Homily 28 on Saint Matthew’s Gospel.

And in case your wondering, Father Corapi is one of the most orthodox theologians around.

No mortal understands the Sacred Heart of Jesus. Theologians say the Sacred (Human) Heart of Jesus possesses a finite degree of sanctifying grace (it’s not possible for sanctifying grace to be infinite). So the Divine Nature is even more unfathomable. Jesus is like an icon (this is now my own maybe unorthodox thought), through which God shines.

This sounds very heterodox/heretical to me. Jesus IS the icon of the invisible God, as Saint Paul tells us. He is also God. We don’t just dimly see God through Jesus - we see God in and through Jesus as He is God. Jesus had the fullness of grace. Grace is a participation in the divine life - how could God have anything less then the infinite fullness of that participation in His own life.

The promises of God are irrevocable and the OT says that even if all abandon someone, even a mother her child, that the son of God will never be forgotten by God – period. The angels, including the fallen ones (cf. Genesis) are described as the “sons of God”. Thus they too fall under that promise that they will never be forgotten by God. This is obviously more than just saying God is omniscient or has a good memory. This is a spiritual mystery we need not try to figure out. We just need to love without exception. Jesus didn’t say “Love your enemies except Satan”; he said “Love your enemies”. No ifs ands or buts.

The demons will not be reconciled at the end of time. That is theological nonsense. The fall of the demons is irrevocable (which is due to their nature and not a defect of God’s mercy) and thus they cannot be in heaven - ever.

 

[JMJ_coder]

No, I’d have to give props to those who believe they are homosexual but who have never slept with the same sex. And remain so because of their religious beliefs. I highly respect them and doubt that I would know whether or not they were homosexual.

Those are not ‘active’ homosexuals. Those are people who, with the grace of God, persevere in fighting against their particular spiritual weakness.

And you’re right - they are to be highly commended and respected for their following the will of God and persevering through temptations.

 

[Swan]

I re-edited my post. Go back and read it.

The Apostles treated Jesus’ body with the greatest possible respect once His hour of self-willed sacrifice was done. They mourned over it, buried it with honour and dignity, and the women went back on Sunday to do more honour to it. We can do no less to His presence in the Eucharist than treat it with utmost respect and never allow ANYONE to disrespect it.

We can no more sit idly by and permit people to sin than we can idly sit by and permit them to commit crimes. It’s our duty to try to stop crime when we know it’s going to happen, likewise it is our duty to try to stop people committing sin if we can. Otherwise we’re complicit in it.

The consecrated host has value only to those who believe in its “consecration”. It has no more meaning for a Satanist than a Baptist, if you get my point. LaVey would certainly ask why he should bother with such a thing, as would every serious left-hand path person I know. This just isn’t happening (I’m not saying there’s not some nut out there who thinks it’ll get him somewhere, it’s the same kind of mindless nonsense that leads to folks sacrificing black cats on Halloween), but it is not common by a long shot. I say this to try and put your mind at ease as much as I can in this matter. As a former Catholic, I understand the important of the Eucharist to you and I want you to know that desecration is not carried out willy nilly by anybody.

 

[LilyM]

The consecrated host has value only to those who believe in its “consecration”. It has no more meaning for a Satanist than a Baptist, if you get my point. LaVey would certainly ask why he should bother with such a thing, as would every serious left-hand path person I know. This just isn’t happening (I’m not saying there’s not some nut out there who thinks it’ll get him somewhere, it’s the same kind of mindless nonsense that leads to folks sacrificing black cats on Halloween), but it is not common by a long shot. I say this to try and put your mind at ease as much as I can in this matter. As a former Catholic, I understand the important of the Eucharist to you and I want you to know that desecration is not carried out willy nilly by anybody.

My posts had nothing to do with whether or not Satanists want to desecrate hosts.

I was simply responding to the previous poster who said that IF someone wants to desecrate the Host we shouldn’t try to prevent it, although we need not actively help them to do so or anything.

Which is boloney with bells on, and I was explaining why.