i think it is indecent that catholic priests bugger children…tell us how to live our lives…for the catholic church to have secrets…that the catholic church blieves it has a higher word than the word of God itself…that catholic church doesnt revise its flawed doctrines.
Pardon my groan as yet another fuss is made over priests. No sane person claims that priests are better than the rest of humanity. That said, they fall into sickness and temptation just as the rest of us do. Luckily there are more alcoholic priests than child molesters. The Church tells you how to live your life in so much as it tells you how to live it well. Your parents do the same thing. They tell you not to play in the street, to eat your vegetables, to clean your room. They mold your habits and do their best to keep your body healthy. The Church acts as a spiritual parent and does her best to keep our spirit healthy. Usually the only reason people have a problem with that is because she tells you to do something you don’t like. Funny, that’s usually why kids dislike their parents.
The Catholic Church is one of the LEAST secretive organizations/religions on the planet, probably in history. It posts nearly everything on the internet, and what isn’t posted tends to be tedious things that you probably wouldn’t care about unless you were already in the position to fly out there and look through their underground library. The one situation in which they keep secrets would be in regards to those priests they’ve found to molest children. Why? Because what does it solve to publicly deface a person and humilliate or enrage the people around them? They don’t just sit back and do nothing. They strip that priest of his priveledge to minister to the public and usually ship him somewhere where no one can find him to hurt him. That’s what happened to my priest, anyhow.
That bit about the Church having a higher Word than God sounds like personal issues, considering the Church believes no such thing. She has a higher word than yours, but she can do nothing that goes against the Word of God. Same with those ‘flawed doctrines’. Flawed in whose eyes? Yours, it seems.
the obelisk and all the egyptian mumbo jumbo is there for a reason and no matter how pretty they paint it with different words, the fact is, the concept predates catholicism and the fact is that it symboliziation also predates catholicism. BUT if it has become an issue, why not simply remove it? WHERE IN THE WHOLE BIBLE DOES IT SAY IT NEEDS TO BE THERE?
Just because a concept predates Catholocism doesn’t mean that the Church adopts those concepts with the intention of adopting their significance and meaning. When you take away the faith and worship of said obelisk as being a representation of a sun god immediately takes away that significance of the structure. To believe that any such obelisk is a symbol of the sun god is to offer that structure a power over you. It becomes idolatry.
Someone correct me if I’m wrong here.
Architecture and that sort of thing does not contain the beliefs of its creators. It’s purely architecture. Just because a modern monument resembles a specific monument of the past does not mean that the modern one is erected for the same reason - look at the monuments in DC. Is the Washington Monument, an obelisk, a monument to the sun god? No.
The Church has been adopting pagan practices for almost the entirety of the Church’s existance. Why? Not to paganize the Church. Rather, to take those pagan practices and make them holy, while at the same time making newcomers to the Church feel more welcome, more at ease, more at home. V-II did something similar in allowing the Mass to be said in the vernacular.
Why not remove the things that make other people get fussy? Because that’s stupid. No offense. But athiests have problems with our believing in God, should we accomodate them, too? If you’re going by the Bible for your guidelines, then tell me where the Bible says we should remove all things that people may misinterpret? Where does it say that obelisks are representations of the devil? As another poster pointed out via a Woodrow quote, there were pillars outside of the temple, and God became a pillar of fire.
sabat in hebrew means seven, and the sabath is on the seventh day, which is saturday.
saba in arabaic also means seven.
sorry for bursting any bubbles
This is a common misconception, one that should probably be taught a little better, in RCIA and CCD courses alike, or even from the pulpit now and again.
The Church did not move the sabbath to Sunday. The Church still holds that the Sabbath is on Saturday (which may be why the weekend incorporates Saturday, as well, but I don’t know for sure about that). However, while one is expected to keep holy the Sabbath, by rest, prayer, reflection, etc, Worship is to be done on Sunday. Why? Because Jesus Christ ressurrected on a Sunday. How do we know this? Because of the series of events leading up to the Ressurection. Someone correct me if I get this wrong, because I’m doing this from the top of my head. Passover was on a Thursday, which is the day Christ celebrated the Last Supper. That night, while praying in the garden, he’s arrested. Friday, he’s tried, crucified, and dies. If we recall some things that were said in the Bible, we know that they were anxious to get Jesus down off of the cross and buried because the Sabbath was the next day, and they wouldn’t be able to do it then. We also recall what Christ said, that he would raise up in three days. Friday. Saturday. Sunday. The three Mary’s hurried to the tomb the day after the Sabbath so that they could annoint Christ’s body, only to find that he had risen.
That is why we Worship on Sunday.
Not because it’s called Sun Day.
For goodness sake, people, grow up a little and do some research.
Sorry to burst your bubble.
