I'm Pagan...

[buffalo]

The whole world? Taoists experience your god? But they are probably a religious kind of atheist.

Perhaps. So some god created us in a faulty way?

And then there are people who experience plenty of gods, perhaps their receiving mechanisms are even better than yours, if you fail to experience all of their gods. Hm?

I used the phrase “can expereince God”. Man has an innate desire to experience God. There are many things that influence their search. Catholics have Revelation as the sure roadmap.

 

[usagi1962]

My fiance urged me to post a response to this thread, because I too am a former Pagan.

Pagan Fury, I have eight little words for you. Maybe you remember them:

An it harm none, do what ye will.

It’s called the Rede. Pagans and Wiccans all know it; we learn it early on.

Good advice for everyone, not just Pagans and Wiccans.

Blessed Be!!

 

[wisdomseeker]

Oh yeah, that makes it easy for you of course. Glad you know better than me, what I feel and what desires I have. Thanks, Siggi Freud.

even siggi admitted he was wrong on the end. how do you think you got here on this earth?

 

[1234]

homosexuality is contrary to the natural law. It is also contrary to what we believe marriage to be and what the family is.

If the Church taught that homosexuality was evil because it just said it was “immoral” or because scripture says so - then I wouldnt believe it. Instead the Church uses reason.

Well, the RCC used ‘reason’ to declare that contraception was against the ‘natural law’. They were the only church in modern times to declare this.

Does the RCC use ‘reason’ to support transubstantiation or the assumption? Probably, with the same result.

So I wouldn’t trust the RCC’s attitude on homosexuality.

The OT, which opposed homosexuality, also supported the stoning of (women) adulterers.

Also, I don’t look to the RCC, given its history, exactly to be the arbiter on faith and morals.

 

[Gamera]

Well, the RCC used ‘reason’ to declare that contraception was against the ‘natural law’. They were the only church in modern times to declare this.

No, that isn’t true. As recently as 1920 the Angilcan Church at its Lambeth conference denounced the immorality of artificial birth control. Ten years later, in 1930, the Anglican Church changed its mind and became the first church in history to approve the morality of artificial birth control.

 

[Freshman88]

Well, the RCC used ‘reason’ to declare that contraception was against the ‘natural law’. They were the only church in modern times to declare this.

Reason and faith. The two cannot be separated.
Catholics take pride that they are the only Church to have declared this in modern times, because are teachings do not change from age to age. The Church of today is the same as the Church of yesterday. Thus not only does Catholic (universal) denote the Church’s mission to the whole of the world but to the whole of time.

Does the RCC use ‘reason’ to support transubstantiation or the assumption? Probably, with the same result.

Same result? I’m sorry but I don’t understand.
But yes, the Church uses reason to support those articles of faith.

So I wouldn’t trust the RCC’s attitude on homosexuality.

You wouldn’t trust the Church’s teaching on homosexuality because the same thinking leads to a ban on contraceptions? Do you test all other moral systems with similar presumptions?

The OT, which opposed homosexuality, also supported the stoning of (women) adulterers.

I fail to see how this is connected. The Old Testament is not the sole basis for Christian thought.

Also, I don’t look to the RCC, given its history, exactly to be the arbiter on faith and morals.

You seem to be confusing two elements of the Church. There are the teachings of the Church which are perfect then there are the men who follow these teachings who not being perfect are not able to follow these perfect teachings.

Every Catholic, from the pope to the simplest of laymen struggle to follow the teachings of Christ and his Church. As long as we are human and as long as we struggle, there will continue to be sinners in the Church. In fact the Church exists solely for sinners, so She will always consist of sinners.

If you are looking for a perfect organization, you are going to be disappointed.

 

[1234]

Reason and faith. The two cannot be separated.
Catholics take pride that they are the only Church to have declared this in modern times, because are teachings do not change from age to age. The Church of today is the same as the Church of yesterday. Thus not only does Catholic (universal) denote the Church’s mission to the whole of the world but to the whole of time.

Same result? I’m sorry but I don’t understand.
But yes, the Church uses reason to support those articles of faith.

You wouldn’t trust the Church’s teaching on homosexuality because the same thinking leads to a ban on contraceptions? Do you test all other moral systems with similar presumptions?

I fail to see how this is connected. The Old Testament is not the sole basis for Christian thought.

You seem to be confusing two elements of the Church. There are the teachings of the Church which are perfect then there are the men who follow these teachings who not being perfect are not able to follow these perfect teachings.

Every Catholic, from the pope to the simplest of laymen struggle to follow the teachings of Christ and his Church. As long as we are human and as long as we struggle, there will continue to be sinners in the Church. In fact the Church exists solely for sinners, so She will always consist of sinners.

If you are looking for a perfect organization, you are going to be disappointed.

1920 was not in the modern era. 1920 was 88 years ago, a long time ago from the standpoint of science and contraception.

Lambeth has never proclaimed infallibility and its decrees don’t have the ‘weight’ of Rome’s.

One of the RCC’s greatest intellectual failings is its reliance on ‘faith’. The RCC uses ‘faith’ to plug up the holes that reason doesn’t fill, whereas other religions and denominations stick with reason and history, with a few assumptions to fill in the deficiencies of the New Testament, (deficiencies which non-believers don’t think can be overcome).

It’s awfully easy to be a sinner in the RCC. I have never seen so much emphasis on sin. If the RCC, and the RCC alone, defines masturbation and contraception as sins, well, then *everyone’*s a sinner!

Regarding the much-vaunted immutability of the RCC, the allegation that the RCC never changes, I would like to hear the Protestant theologians on the CAF weigh in on the papal teaching , bulls and encyclicals on profit-making and usury. My understanding is that it used to be a sin to lend money at interest and to make a profit on sales. This is one reason that Jews were so despised. If course, later the RCC changed its mind.

 

[buffalo]

Regarding the much-vaunted immutability of the RCC, the allegation that the RCC never changes, I would like to hear the Protestant theologians on the CAF weigh in on the papal teaching , bulls and encyclicals on profit-making and usury. My understanding is that it used to be a sin to lend money at interest and to make a profit on sales. This is one reason that Jews were so despised. If course, later the RCC changed its mind.

Yeah, the road to heaven is tough. Jesus did not say it was easy.

Perhaps this article on usury will clarify your perceptions.

 

[Freshman88]

1920 was not in the modern era. 1920 was 88 years ago, a long time ago from the standpoint of science and contraception.

Lambeth has never proclaimed infallibility and its decrees don’t have the ‘weight’ of Rome’s.

Thats fine (I wasn’t the poster who brought up Lambeth)

One of the RCC’s greatest intellectual failings is its reliance on ‘faith’. The RCC uses ‘faith’ to plug up the holes that reason doesn’t fill,

Greatest intellectual failings? I disagree! This is our strong point.

Reason cannot provide the answer to our heart’s deepest yearnings for meaning and salvation in this life. We needed revelation from God in order to understand what was beyond. In other words, we being mere mortals who are not able to go beyond our limitations, must rely on the divine.

If reason cannot answer an area, it is only natural that faith fulfills that area.

whereas other religions and denominations stick with reason and history, with a few assumptions to fill in the deficiencies of the New Testament, (deficiencies which non-believers don’t think can be overcome).

The very act of believing in the New Testament is an act of faith, the very act of trusting the biblical account of history is an act of faith. I don’t see how you can say that these denominations don’t rely on faith.

It’s awfully easy to be a sinner in the RCC. I have never seen so much emphasis on sin. If the RCC, and the RCC alone, defines masturbation and contraception as sins, well, then *everyone’*s a sinner!

Everyone is a sinner, regardless of masturbation and contraception. You have to diagnosis the “sickness” and recognize it, if you are to be cured. In the case of human souls, sin is the sickness and Christ is the cure.

Regarding the much-vaunted immutability of the RCC, the allegation that the RCC never changes, I would like to hear the Protestant theologians on the CAF weigh in on the papal teaching , bulls and encyclicals on profit-making and usury. My understanding is that it used to be a sin to lend money at interest and to make a profit on sales. This is one reason that Jews were so despised. If course, later the RCC changed its mind.

The Church may appear to change, but don’t confuse physical changes and administrative changes for a change on revelation or faith and morals.

 

[Swan]

Thats fine (I wasn’t the poster who brought up Lambeth)

Greatest intellectual failings? I disagree! This is our strong point.

Reason cannot provide the answer to our heart’s deepest yearnings for meaning and salvation in this life. We needed revelation from God in order to understand what was beyond. In other words, we being mere mortals who are not able to go beyond our limitations, must rely on the divine.

If reason cannot answer an area, it is only natural that faith fulfills that area.

The very act of believing in the New Testament is an act of faith, the very act of trusting the biblical account of history is an act of faith. I don’t see how you can say that these denominations don’t rely on faith.

Everyone is a sinner, regardless of masturbation and contraception. You have to diagnosis the “sickness” and recognize it, if you are to be cured. In the case of human souls, sin is the sickness and Christ is the cure.

The Church may appear to change, but don’t confuse physical changes and administrative changes for a change on revelation or faith and morals.

What about the earth being the center of the universe? That was considered obvious by theologians for a long time and to suggest otherwise was heresy. Only when the fact that the earth is not the center of the universe was this teaching changed.

 

[Freshman88]

What about the earth being the center of the universe? That was considered obvious by theologians for a long time and to suggest otherwise was heresy. Only when the fact that the earth is not the center of the universe was this teaching changed.

That was mere opinion, and not at all critical to salvation.

Galieo was only charged with heresy because he claimed that his findings proved the bible wrong - saying the bible is wrong is heresy but saying the Sun is at the centre of the galaxy is not.

 

[magisterfaust]

Hi to you pagan fury. I do state “undecided” as my belief on my profile, but i do sit on the pagan side of the fence. :
tiphat:

 

[Hastrman]

Well, the RCC used ‘reason’ to declare that contraception was against the ‘natural law’. They were the only church in modern times to declare this.

So you’re now subscribing to consensual reality?

Does the RCC use ‘reason’ to support transubstantiation or the assumption? Probably, with the same result.

Both are eminently reasonable propositions, if you’re not already a doctrinaire Pre-Socratic Lucretian atomist, aka a materialist (aka a philosophical illiterate who isn’t smart enough to know they should be an existential monist).

Also, I don’t look to the RCC, given its history, exactly to be the arbiter on faith and morals.

You’re right, let’s ask the atheists to do it.

Wait, what religion were Hitler, Lenin, Stalin, and Mao again?

 

[Hastrman]

I’m still curious about something, and have never gotten an answer: why do you think you’re pagans?

Just because you decided to practice a fanfiction religion that combines a moribund liberal Protestantism with a wholly inaccurate assortment of gods from cultures you know nothing about with a system of magic that can’t do horoscopes, let alone summon rainstorms, does not make you a pagan.

For instance: “If you harm none, do as you will.”

What possible paganism is there in that? Tell me one historically pagan culture that would not have found such a statement utterly vacuous and probably offensively amoral.

The Celts? Nope, Celtic religion was basically early Hinduism (not really big on “do as you will”) with an idea of clan-obligation the yakuza would find restrictive. Sometimes it is one’s duty to one’s clan to harm someone–and sometimes the gods demand human sacrifice.

The Romans? Basically same as the Celts, but without human sacrifice.

The Greeks? Basically like the Romans, but with a lower status for women and a charming practice of educational pederasty.

The Germans? See the Celts, except with a raiding-based economy–also their gods are the Ashuras not the Devas, so there’s an even stricter idea of obligation.

The Slavs? Again, like the Celts, but with arguably even meaner gods.

The Lithuanians? Like the Slavs–and I’ll wager you didn’t even know there was a separate Lithuanian culture.

My point is, you’re not reviving any real tradition–you’re making one up. And you’d just better hope the gods you’re pretending to worship aren’t real, because if the reaction of the Diyin Dine’e (the Navajo gods) to having their Night Chant filmed all the way through is any indication, gods don’t like to be messed with.

“Why?” you ask, “What was their reaction?”

The medicine man, one of the dancers, the patient the chant was for, and the (white) cameraman, all died within a very brief time. Only the medicine man was particularly old.

 

[buffalo]

What about the earth being the center of the universe? That was considered obvious by theologians for a long time and to suggest otherwise was heresy. Only when the fact that the earth is not the center of the universe was this teaching changed.

The earth is the center of God’s creation. It still applies. And by the way where exactly is the center of the universe?

 

[stringbeanduck]

Ill just let you sit on the knowledge that I am 17, male. I have a boyfriend, whom I love and do naughty things to in public settings. I strongly dislike the Catholic church in that they have kept me down, and my strong Pagan ties have given me stablilty and strength through the hardest of times. All without God, Jesus, or Jehovah, bet you didn’t know that was possible.

May be wondering why a Pagan is coming onto a Catholic forum, well… I’m not begging for my soul, I’m returning the favor. Too many Catholic visit the Pagan forum and tell us what sinners and heathens we are. In fact many of us aren’t Heathen in that, Heathen is a completely unique spiritual path, like druidism, Witchcraft, etc.

On that note, I open the floor to you all, and finger my pentacle lovingly as I wait for responses.

Friend you haven’t even a clue what love is. You’re 17 now. Give it 23 yrs bud and you’ll laugh about this day when you’re done with this junk. No I’m not wondering why you’re here because the moment I read your post I knew you were seeking attention. So that how you get your endorphins huh. Feeding off the reaction of other when you tell them something odd natured. ehh I’ve seen more creative ways to seek attention than that. But with this society I don’t blame you. Anyways I’ll pray for your mind and soul that you turn to God as you grow more knowledge. Like it or not bud you can’t refuse this prayer. God bless.

 

[Hastrman]

And by the way where exactly is the center of the universe?

Short answer, in Chinese: wu 無.

Long answer, it hasn’t got one, geometrically speaking; and I wouldn’t be so sure about it being the center of God’s creation (I have a hunch that, not counting the damned, we’re at the bottom–sort of like the Jewish idea of them being chosen because they were the lowliest of people, that God’s greatness might show forth more).

 

[buffalo]

Short answer, in Chinese: wu 無.

Long answer, it hasn’t got one, geometrically speaking; and I wouldn’t be so sure about it being the center of God’s creation (I have a hunch that, not counting the damned, we’re at the bottom–sort of like the Jewish idea of them being chosen because they were the lowliest of people, that God’s greatness might show forth more).

Man is in the center of the smallest distances and the largest. When looking at the universe everything is red shifting away (as it would be in other parts).

One can easily conclude by connecting many dots that we enjoy that position.

[355](javascriptpenWindow(‘cr/355.htm’) "God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him, male and female he created them."218 Man occupies a unique place in creation: (I) he is “in the image of God”; (II) in his own nature he unites the spiritual and material worlds; (III) he is created “male and female”; (IV) God established him in his friendship.
[355](javascriptpenWindow(‘cr/355.htm’) "God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him, male and female he created them."218 Man occupies a unique place in creation: (I) he is “in the image of God”; (II) in his own nature he unites the spiritual and material worlds; (III) he is created “male and female”; (IV) God established him in his friendship.

 

[Hastrman]

Man is in the center of the smallest distances and the largest. When looking at the universe everything is red shifting away (as it would be in other parts).

One can easily conclude by connecting many dots that we enjoy that position.

[355](javascriptpenWindow(‘cr/355.htm’) "God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him, male and female he created them."218 Man occupies a unique place in creation: (I) he is “in the image of God”; (II) in his own nature he unites the spiritual and material worlds; (III) he is created “male and female”; (IV) God established him in his friendship.
[355](javascriptpenWindow(‘cr/355.htm’) "God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him, male and female he created them."218 Man occupies a unique place in creation: (I) he is “in the image of God”; (II) in his own nature he unites the spiritual and material worlds; (III) he is created “male and female”; (IV) God established him in his friendship.

Define “man”. Rationally, see, there could be any number of rational animals, all of which would count as “man” for spiritual/philosophical purposes.

Still want someone to answer my question about why they think they’re pagans, though.

 

[Swan]

That was mere opinion, and not at all critical to salvation.

Galieo was only charged with heresy because he claimed that his findings proved the bible wrong - saying the bible is wrong is heresy but saying the Sun is at the centre of the galaxy is not.

It is my understanding that the Church had interpreted scripture to mean that the earth was the center of our solar system (Buffalo: our solar system, that the rest of the planets, including the sun, revolved around the earth), and that this had to be true since we are the highest of God’s creatures. Any contradiction, by anyone, would, therefore, contradict the Bible as interpreted by the Church.