S
Steeltemplar
Guest
Sorry. No good.
Sources please. Good ones this time. As far as I can see, all you have is a bunch of unsupported claims and what amounts to conspiracy theories.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
Sources please. Good ones this time. As far as I can see, all you have is a bunch of unsupported claims and what amounts to conspiracy theories.
S
skyryder
Guest
Go to your college library, ask for a Union List. Order the book mentioned above from the University or Seminary nearest you which has the institution, then read the book. I can’t do this for you. This is a complex mattter and takes several hundred pages to understand. There are no short quick answers like in the catechism…which by the way is also based on hundreds of pages in the Bible.Sorry. No good.
Sources please. Good ones this time. As far as I can see, all you have is a bunch of unsupported claims and what amounts to conspiracy theories.
E
eelpis
Guest
No, Catholicism is not dead “If you come upon the ‘spirit of Vatican II’ would you please drive a stake through it’s breast.”
E
estesbob
Guest
I am still waiting for him to post sources backing up his ointention that there is no biological difference between men and women.Sorry. No good.
Sources please. Good ones this time. As far as I can see, all you have is a bunch of unsupported claims and what amounts to conspiracy theories.
L
Lance
Guest
No, it is alive and well here in Northern Illinois!
S
Steeltemplar
Guest
Translation: You have no way to support your claims in the least and so you are trying to get rid of people who ask for that troublesome “evidence” stuff.Go to your college library, ask for a Union List. Order the book mentioned above from the University or Seminary nearest you which has the institution, then read the book. I can’t do this for you. This is a complex mattter and takes several hundred pages to understand. There are no short quick answers like in the catechism…which by the way is also based on hundreds of pages in the Bible.
S
skyryder
Guest
Suggest starting on line with something like the “Medscape” Web Search Engine. Look up::* Molecular Endocrinology of Sex Differentiation*I am still waiting for him to post sources backing up his ointention that there is no biological difference between men and women.
Under subheadings type:
Genetic Syndromes Associated With Ambiguous Genitalia or Sex Reversal
The x and y chromosome normally trigger male or female organs to develop by turning on or off biological switches in out bodies, In reality we all have both male and female parts programmed into our bodies. Which organs are expressed is determined by the endocrine system. But sometimes these malfunction. You can have a woman with a penis or a male with ovaries.and breasts or other anomolies. Sometimes we call these people transgendered. It is possible to correct sexual mosaics using surgery and/or hormone therapy. There is such a thing as a person who is psychologically one sex and physically the other. Sex change operations can also be successfully done by manipulating endocrinology. Because there is no biological difference between Men and Women there is no valid reason for the ban on women’s ordination.
One other thing to consider. Suggest reading Scientific American’'s issue on Human Sexuality 2006. The church’s stance on homosexuality is dead wrong from the standpoint of hard science. Special issue is good reading and based on several decades of advanced research. You can order this on line if it is not available at your library. Homosexuality if part genetic, part behavioral and largely endocrine based. St Jerome’s mistranslation of the Bible into Latin caused lots of Vatican errors on sexuality. One needs to read the original Greek and/or Aramaic to understand the original idea. We need to stop gay bashing and re think our basis for what is and isn’t sinful…
I think the real reason the Bishops are afraid of Genetic and Stem Cell Research is that they will be forced into a major rewrite of church doctine which will be painful and long overdue.
S
skyryder
Guest
Sorry you can’t kill the Holy Spirit. Others have tried. It’s impossible. One thing we can be assured of however is thatNo, Catholicism is not dead “If you come upon the ‘spirit of Vatican II’ would you please drive a stake through it’s breast.”
all Tradition eventually winds up at the Junk Yard. Because God
is a living, creative being…we need to embrace change and growth.
S
skyryder
Guest
SteelTemplar realize again that Official Church History and Real Church History are two different things. Look at a typical medeval painting of Scribes and Lords and you’ll see the problem. The Lord or Bishop told the scribe what to say word by word…Even if he was wrong, it was written down. Anyone who took exception was condemned to prision or death.eg Galileo. Given that people lie to stay in power, cover up crimes, develop a public image for posterity, slander rivals, or justify their lavish lifestyle, …one needs to examine such exercises in Self Agrandisemwnt with caution.In other words check out an event or institution from several vantage points before buying the propaganda.Some of the touch stones we use to determine truth is to look at writings of nations or people they do not control or influence. When one looks at the Coptic and Greek Churches one uncovers long standing demecratic governance which spans many centuries. We note that similar structures in the early church in Rome and then see them being abolished gradually by a Papacy with ever growing pretensions. Regarding the Council of Constance one needs to look at the behavior of the Early Protestants who for many years saw themselves as both reformers and catholics. That the church was seen as a democracy was shown in the Councilar Movement which was embraced in the Holy Roman Empire and was the basis of the Council of Constance. The Roman Papacy’s reniging on democracy and pursuing new levels of tyrany/corruption ultimately lead to Martin Luther’s rebellion, the Protestant Reformation and 100 years of war between Catholics and Protestants. I guess we can say early on that there was evidence based on civil war which dramatically supports my position. Trent was one of the worst disasters that befell the Church. Read Kung!Translation: You have no way to support your claims in the least and so you are trying to get rid of people who ask for that troublesome “evidence” stuff.
S
Steeltemplar
Guest
See…you make all of these claims…on and on…without ever presenting any evidence whatsoever.SteelTemplar realize again that Official Church History and Real Church History are two different things. Look at a typical medeval painting of Scribes and Lords and you’ll see the problem. The Lord or Bishop told the scribe what to say word by word…Even if he was wrong, it was written down. Anyone who took exception was condemned to prision or death.eg Galileo. Given that people lie to stay in power, cover up crimes, develop a public image for posterity, slander rivals, or justify their lavish lifestyle, …one needs to examine such exercises in Self Agrandisemwnt with caution.In other words check out an event or institution from several vantage points before buying the propaganda.Some of the touch stones we use to determine truth is to look at writings of nations or people they do not control or influence. When one looks at the Coptic and Greek Churches one uncovers long standing demecratic governance which spans many centuries. We note that similar structures in the early church in Rome and then see them being abolished gradually by a Papacy with ever growing pretensions. Regarding the Council of Constance one needs to look at the behavior of the Early Protestants who for many years saw themselves as both reformers and catholics. That the church was seen as a democracy was shown in the Councilar Movement which was embraced in the Holy Roman Empire and was the basis of the Council of Constance. The Roman Papacy’s reniging on democracy and pursuing new levels of tyrany/corruption ultimately lead to Martin Luther’s rebellion, the Protestant Reformation and 100 years of war between Catholics and Protestants. I guess we can say early on that there was evidence based on civil war which dramatically supports my position. Trent was one of the worst disasters that befell the Church. Read Kung!
When I press you for evidence, you squirm and try to bury the subject in still more unsupported claims. What you don’t do is actually provide anything of use.
Of course, in your tirades against the Church, you always insist that I should believe you and those who think your way. So many of your “arguments” come down to unsupportable claims that everything that disagrees with you must be some kind of lie. Naturally, that is because it is the only way you can think of to try to deflect the weight of real evidence.
So I am still waiting for some kind of actual proof from you. In the meantime, there is really no purpose in feeding the troll anymore. If you ever post anything worthwhile in terms of sourcing, I’ll certainly let you know.
E
edwest2
Guest
No we don’t. No knowledge, wisdom or enlightenment poured into anyone’s head when the calendar changed from the 20th to the 21st Century. “We’re living in the 21st Century.” Yeah, so what?Sorry you can’t kill the Holy Spirit. Others have tried. It’s impossible. One thing we can be assured of however is that
all Tradition eventually winds up at the Junk Yard. Because God
is a living, creative being…we need to embrace change and growth.
Recently, the Pope wore old vestments along with some new to display the Church’s connection and continuity with the past. The Church is guided not by secular trends but by the Holy Spirit of God.
God bless,
Ed
S
skyryder
Guest
See…you make all of these claims…on and on…without ever presenting any evidence whatsoever.j
Steeltemplasr Again check out the books I suggested reading.
For example Kungs History of the Catholic Church.Come to your own conclusions. I think as a conservative, you need to decide who you are going to follow. God or Tradition.
An interesting article from today’s New York Times is summarized below. I think that in many churches it is primarily the “professional” Christians (clergy) who are dogmatic, doctrinaire and narrow minded, and authoritarian; and the further you go up the hierarchical ladder the worse it tends to be.
The New York Times
June 24, 2008
Survey Shows U.S. Religious Tolerance
By NEELA BANERJEE
Although a majority of Americans say religion is very important to them, nearly three-quarters of them say they believe that many faiths besides their own can lead to salvation, according to a survey by the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life.
The report, the U.S. Religious Landscape Survey, reveals a broad trend toward tolerance and an ability among many Americans to hold beliefs that might contradict the doctrines of their professed faiths.
For example, 70 percent of Americans affiliated with a religion or denomination said they agreed that “many religions can lead to eternal life,” including majorities among Protestants and Catholics. Among evangelical Christians, 57 percent agreed with the statement, and among Catholics, 79 percent did.
Among minority faiths, more than 80 percent of Jews, Hindus and Buddhists agreed with the statement, and more than half of Muslims did.
The findings seem to undercut the conventional wisdom that the more religiously committed people are, the more intolerant they are, scholars who reviewed the survey said.
“It’s not that Americans don’t believe in anything,” said Michael Lindsay, assistant director of the Center on Race, Religion and Urban Life at Rice University. “It’s that we believe in everything. We aren’t religious purists or dogmatists.”
“For all respondents, the survey’s margin of sampling error is plus or minus one percentage point. For smaller subgroups of religions or denominations, the margin of sampling error is larger, ranging from 2 to 11 points.
The nationwide survey, which is based on telephone interviews with more than 35,000 adults from May 8 to Aug. 13, 2007, is the second installment of a broad assessment Pew has undertaken of trends and characteristics of the country’s religious life. The first part of the report, published in February, depicted a fluid and diverse national religious life marked by people moving among denominations and faiths.
According to that report, more than a quarter of adult Americans have left the faith of their childhood to join another religion or no religion. The survey indicated that the group that had the greatest net gain was the unaffiliated, accounting for 16 percent of American adults.
The new report sheds light on the beliefs of the unaffiliated. Like the overwhelming majority of Americans, 70 percent of the unaffiliated said they believed in God, including one of every five people who identified themselves as atheist and more than half of those who identified as agnostic.
“What does atheist mean? It may mean they don’t believe in God, or it could be that they are hostile to organized religion,” Mr. Green said. A lot of these unaffiliated people, by some measures, are fairly religious, and then there are those who are affiliated with a religion but don’t believe in God and identify instead with history, traditions, holidays or communities.
The most significant contradictory belief the survey reveals has to do with salvation. Previous surveys have shown that Americans think a majority of their countrymen and women will go to heaven, and that the circle is wide, embracing minorities like Jews, Muslims and atheists. But the Pew survey goes further, showing that such views are held by those within major branches of Christianity and minority faiths, too.
Scholars said such tolerance could stem in part from the greater diversity of American society: that there are more people of minority faiths or no faith and that “it is hard to hold a strongly sectarian view when you work together and your kids play soccer together,” Mr. Lindsay said.
The real challenge to religious leaders is not to become more entrenched in their views, but to navigate the idea of what their religion is all about and how it relates to others.”
F
fix
Guest
So, that is really indifferentism?“it is hard to hold a strongly sectarian view when you work together and your kids play soccer together,” Mr. Lindsay said.
E
edwest2
Guest
This is nonsense. Each religion is firmly entrenched, as they say, in their views.
When I worked in health care, I dealt with people who showed me their Jehovah’s Witness “I can’t get a blood transfusion” card, doctors from India, including female doctors in saris, and coworkers from many faiths and backgrounds. We all got along. I found I could talk to anybody and they could do the same.
It is possible for those of different faiths to live and work together.
God bless,
Ed
When I worked in health care, I dealt with people who showed me their Jehovah’s Witness “I can’t get a blood transfusion” card, doctors from India, including female doctors in saris, and coworkers from many faiths and backgrounds. We all got along. I found I could talk to anybody and they could do the same.
It is possible for those of different faiths to live and work together.
God bless,
Ed
J
JNewfield
Guest
How much of a discussion is catured in the “starter comment” is always a matter of interest. Is there an assumption here that if liberal Catholism is dead that “conservative Catholism” is somehow a “winner”? What seems appartent from discussion of various “ism’s” and forms of government is that the message of Jesus and the nature of His Kingdom stands above all. Perhaps that was what He was trying to tell us when mentioning the issue of putting “new wine in old wineskins”. Perhaps a discussion of how each “…ism” fails to meet the message of Jesus would be a more powerful way to advance the Kingdom.
F
Filius99993
Guest
Actually, I didn’t intend for it to go this way. But then a couple of people happened to voice their opinions. The truth to the matter is, I don’t align myself with any particular political faction (as I have socialistic political views, while at the same time fully support the morals listed in the Catechism), but rather with what the Church teaches. I just think that the Church is probably best in the state it is in right now.How much of a discussion is catured in the “starter comment” is always a matter of interest. Is there an assumption here that if liberal Catholism is dead that “conservative Catholism” is somehow a “winner”? What seems appartent from discussion of various “ism’s” and forms of government is that the message of Jesus and the nature of His Kingdom stands above all. Perhaps that was what He was trying to tell us when mentioning the issue of putting “new wine in old wineskins”. Perhaps a discussion of how each “…ism” fails to meet the message of Jesus would be a more powerful way to advance the Kingdom.
T
Tigg
Guest
I disagree, what you are promoting is a static, unchanging Church. Ask yourself what a static Church brings? Stagnation and internal decay. “Liberalism” is not bad, it is a way of internal renewal in the Church. If following every rule to every i and t is what makes up faith, it ends up being pretty empty.
What are you speaking about? The liturgy and Mass? Doctrine?
We have lived in quite a few places around the United States over the past 20 years. We have lived in the South which, in some parts is so liberal, you leave the church on Sunday morning wondering if you even went to Mass.
What you write above is interesting about following every rule (dotting the i’s and crossing the t’s.) We lived for 6 years in NM and attended a parish where just this very thing was done. The pastor was stern, but very loving and an absolutely “no-nonsense with the liturgy” kind of guy. He was a true Shepherd of the faithful and kept a very watchful eye over all. He was not at all above incorporating a Catechism lesson into the Sunday homily. The Saturday confession lines were so long, you really needed to get there 1/2 hr before they started to ensure your confession would be heard. We had 24-hr Adoration, many ministries and the faithful were fed by continuous classes given by the deacons, or associate pastors. There were several very liberal churches within a few miles of the one we attended. People did, instead, come from all over the city to attend the one “High Mass” (in English) at our parish. They seemed to be starved for that kind of thing, and indeed, it was the largest parish within the city. Not only that, but it was totally Charismatic - WITHOUT being charismatic in an overt way.
If truth is preserved and taught, I believe the Spirit HIMSELF gives renewal and grace and the Church becomes alive. I don’t believe it is in deviating from practices that are the norm.
S
skyryder
Guest
We lived for 6 years in NM and attended a parish where tThe pastor was stern, but very loving and an absolutely “no-nonsense with the liturgy” kind of guy. He was a true Shepherd of the faithful and kept a very watchful eye over all. He was not at all above incorporating a Catechism lesson into the Sunday homily. The Saturday confession lines were so long, you really needed to get there 1/2 hr before they started to ensure your confession would be heard. We had 24-hr Adoration, People came from all over the city to attend the one “High Mass” (in English) at our parish.
If truth is preserved and taught, I believe the Spirit HIMSELF gives renewal and grace and the Church becomes alive. I don’t believe it is in deviating from practices that are the norm.
If truth is preserved and taught, I believe the Spirit HIMSELF gives renewal and grace and the Church becomes alive. I don’t believe it is in deviating from practices that are the norm.
S
skyryder
Guest
It sounds to me like people were drawn by the preaching. New Mexico is hispanic culture, and there is a greater interest in more traditional forms of worship. New Mexico has the highest percentage of Roman Catholics of any Western U.S state. So I am not so sure we have seen a conservative success story.
If one digs deeper you find a growth of mormon and protestant churches with people switching from Catholicism to a new faith.
If one looks at sociological studies of why churches grow or decline, 8 key factors have been discovered which lead to success. 1) Good leadership empowers others to ministry . Ministry is not limited to an ordained priesthood. 2) Successful churches encourage use of each members gifts. Laity is part of all decision making.3} Growing Churches use study of scripture to fomr is a passionate spirituality 4) Church structure is not rigid and can adapt to change. It is not hierarchial but team based. 5) There are many small groups rather than a large body people belong to. 6) Successful churches emphasize outreach and are welcoming to new members…They emphasize evangelism, Questions and discussion are welcome. 7) Growing churches are loving places. Easy place to make friends. 8) Worship is inspiring and appealing to many different demographics. Does the Ratzinger Reforms/Traditional Revival live up to these critical ingrediants for renewel? It appears unlikely but time will tell.
If one digs deeper you find a growth of mormon and protestant churches with people switching from Catholicism to a new faith.
If one looks at sociological studies of why churches grow or decline, 8 key factors have been discovered which lead to success. 1) Good leadership empowers others to ministry . Ministry is not limited to an ordained priesthood. 2) Successful churches encourage use of each members gifts. Laity is part of all decision making.3} Growing Churches use study of scripture to fomr is a passionate spirituality 4) Church structure is not rigid and can adapt to change. It is not hierarchial but team based. 5) There are many small groups rather than a large body people belong to. 6) Successful churches emphasize outreach and are welcoming to new members…They emphasize evangelism, Questions and discussion are welcome. 7) Growing churches are loving places. Easy place to make friends. 8) Worship is inspiring and appealing to many different demographics. Does the Ratzinger Reforms/Traditional Revival live up to these critical ingrediants for renewel? It appears unlikely but time will tell.
U
una_fides
Guest
“They claim that they represent the Church; but in reality, they are the ones who are expelling themselves from it and going astray. Even if Catholics faithful to Tradition are reduced to a handful, they are the ones who are the true Church of Jesus Christ” (St. Athanasius) olrl.org/snt_docs/athnasus.shtml
- Status
- Not open for further replies.