T
terillmorris
Guest
Mickey Mickey I just quoted how you contradicted yourself. Man just admit your wrong!!!
- Status
S
stmaria
Guest
Here are two prayers that were said at Assisi:
.Two tribal animists from Africa intoned:
“Almighty God, the Great Thumb we cannot evade in tying any knot, the Roaring Thunder that splits mighty trees, the All-Seeing Lord up on high who sees even the foot prints of an antelope on a rock mass here on earth… you are the cornerstone of peace.”
“O Great Spirit, I raise my pipe to you, to your messengers the four winds, and to mother earth, who provides for your children… I pray that you bring peace to all my brothers and sisters of this world”
All kinds of false religions praying for peace and yet peace has not been granted. I wonder why?
.Two tribal animists from Africa intoned:
“Almighty God, the Great Thumb we cannot evade in tying any knot, the Roaring Thunder that splits mighty trees, the All-Seeing Lord up on high who sees even the foot prints of an antelope on a rock mass here on earth… you are the cornerstone of peace.”
“O Great Spirit, I raise my pipe to you, to your messengers the four winds, and to mother earth, who provides for your children… I pray that you bring peace to all my brothers and sisters of this world”
All kinds of false religions praying for peace and yet peace has not been granted. I wonder why?
J
JReducation
Guest
How long have Christians and Jews been praying for peace?
Why haven’t they been heard yet?
JR
M
Mickey_Jackson
Guest
“If we go back to the beginnings of the Church, we find a clear affirmation that Christ is the one Savior of all, the only one able to reveal God and lead to God. In reply to the Jewish religious authorities who question the apostles about the healing of the lame man, Peter says: “By the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth whom you crucified, whom God raised from the dead, by him this man is standing before you well… And there is salvation in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved” (Acts 4:10, 12). This statement, which was made to the Sanhedrin, has a universal value, since for all people-Jews and Gentiles alike - salvation can only come from Jesus Christ” (Redemptoris Missio).
“Faith demands a free adherence on the part of man, but at the same time faith must also be offered to him, because the multitudes have the right to know the riches of the mystery of Christ-riches in which we believe that the whole of humanity can find, in unsuspected fullness, everything that it is gropingly searching for concerning God, man and his destiny, life and death, and truth… This is why the Church keeps her missionary spirit alive, and even wishes to intensify it in the moment of history in which we are living. But it must also be stated, again with the Council, that in accordance with their dignity as persons, equipped with reason and free will and endowed with personal responsibility, all are impelled by their own nature and are bound by a moral obligation to seek truth, above all religious truth. They are further bound to hold to the truth once it is known, and to regulate their whole lives by its demands” (Redemptoris Missio).
“While acknowledging that God loves all people and grants them the possibility of being saved (cf. l Tm 2:4), the Church believes that God has established Christ as the one mediator and that she herself has been established as the universal sacrament of salvation. To this catholic unity of the people of God, therefore,…all are called, and they belong to it or are ordered to it in various ways, whether they be Catholic faithful or others who believe in Christ or finally all people everywhere who by the grace of God are called to salvation. It is necessary to keep these two truths together, namely, the real possibility of salvation in Christ for all mankind and the necessity of the Church for salvation. Both these truths help us to understand the one mystery of salvation, so that we can come to know God’s mercy and our own responsibility. Salvation, which always remains a gift of the Holy Spirit, requires man’s cooperation, both to save himself and to save others. This is God’s will, and this is **why he established the Church and made her a part of his plan of salvation.” ** (Redemptoris Missio)
“Faith demands a free adherence on the part of man, but at the same time faith must also be offered to him, because the multitudes have the right to know the riches of the mystery of Christ-riches in which we believe that the whole of humanity can find, in unsuspected fullness, everything that it is gropingly searching for concerning God, man and his destiny, life and death, and truth… This is why the Church keeps her missionary spirit alive, and even wishes to intensify it in the moment of history in which we are living. But it must also be stated, again with the Council, that in accordance with their dignity as persons, equipped with reason and free will and endowed with personal responsibility, all are impelled by their own nature and are bound by a moral obligation to seek truth, above all religious truth. They are further bound to hold to the truth once it is known, and to regulate their whole lives by its demands” (Redemptoris Missio).
“While acknowledging that God loves all people and grants them the possibility of being saved (cf. l Tm 2:4), the Church believes that God has established Christ as the one mediator and that she herself has been established as the universal sacrament of salvation. To this catholic unity of the people of God, therefore,…all are called, and they belong to it or are ordered to it in various ways, whether they be Catholic faithful or others who believe in Christ or finally all people everywhere who by the grace of God are called to salvation. It is necessary to keep these two truths together, namely, the real possibility of salvation in Christ for all mankind and the necessity of the Church for salvation. Both these truths help us to understand the one mystery of salvation, so that we can come to know God’s mercy and our own responsibility. Salvation, which always remains a gift of the Holy Spirit, requires man’s cooperation, both to save himself and to save others. This is God’s will, and this is **why he established the Church and made her a part of his plan of salvation.” ** (Redemptoris Missio)
T
terillmorris
Guest
Mickey you still havent apologized for you error that I pointed out that you made, but anyway–You are preaching to the choir with your quotes from JPII. I never said he didnt make statments regarding salvation, and the Church’s necessity. I said that his statements werent very strong. That is still my opinion. Also, his actions, like Assisi, kissing the koran, calling Budism a “great rich of Asia” etc. Dilutes his words and leaves, in my opinion, an ambiguous message. You may disagree, but I guees that is the point. We disagree. I beleive you are totally wrong, and I assume you believe I am as well. Another question do you believe that when John Paul II kissed the Koran (in a public setting) was a bad example? Or do you believe there is nothing wrong with that? Or it is no big deal?
M
Mickey_Jackson
Guest
You clearly misunderstood me, so let me explain myself. What I said was that the attitude that seems to be prevalent among self-proclaimed Traditionalists is that the Pope, rather than inviting the leaders of other religions to Assisi, should have told them that they are Hell-bound if they do not convert. They seem to have the sense that because the Pope did not say this, he was not evangelizing. What I said is that the Pope was evangelizing, by proclaiming to the world that “Peace bears the name of Jesus Christ.” Not once did I say that the latter statement is equivalent to the former; I said that it is a much better way to proclaim the Name of Christ to all nations. You cannot spread the Gospel by threatening people! Try it, and let me know how it works. I know of quite a few people who were led to the Church not by threatening words, but by the admirable example of Her leaders (the Muslim cleric whom Benedict XVI baptized at the Easter Vigil is a perfect example).
It is noteworthy that never once did the Apostles threaten Hell to those to whom they evangelized; rather, they used words very similar to those of our late Holy Father, emphasizing the goodness of the Lord and His love for all mankind.
M
Mickey_Jackson
Guest
Heck, Saint Paul even complimented the pagan Athenians on their religiosity, and tried to show them that the fulfillment of what they were trying to accomplish with their religious practices is found in Jesus Christ. This is, essentially, what JPII tried to do at Assisi.
I’ll ask you again: did you ever read the second article that I posted? The author is much more knowledgeable than I am on theology, and presents an airtight case.
I’ll ask you again: did you ever read the second article that I posted? The author is much more knowledgeable than I am on theology, and presents an airtight case.
M
Mickey_Jackson
Guest
If I may be so bold as to ask, what seminary do you attend? Do your superiors know that you are posting remarks that are so uncharitable in tone? Unless it’s an SSPX seminary, I would imagine that they’d have quite a problem with this. Remember the words of Saint Paul from last Sunday’s Epistle: we should never be afraid to speak the Truth, but we should always do so with gentleness and charity; otherwise, we simply give Christ’s Church a bad name. If you disagree with me, that’s fine, but please don’t call my opinions “laughable,” particularly when you have, whether intentionally or not, misrepresented my statements.
M
Mickey_Jackson
Guest
- Regarding my “error,” see above.
- Regarding his statements about Buddha, this is nothing new. For hundreds of years, Catholic missionaries in Asia have been allowed to acknowledge the truths present in the teachings of, for example, Confucius, and draw upon these truths familiar to the natives to better explain Christianity. If you think this is wrong, then I guess you think Aquinas was a heretic for drawing on the wisdom of the pagan Aristotle. Fulton Sheen says as much in the quote that you’ll find in the second article.
- Regarding JPII’s kiss of the Koran: he claims to have been under the impression that it is a Middle Eastern custom to, when receiving a gift, kiss that gift. I don’t see any reason why he should not be given the benefit of the doubt; if you think he is lying, at least come out and say so rather than just implying it. And frankly, even if it was intentional, it was clearly nothing more than to show respect for the sincere convictions of others. Again, this is not some Modernist innovation; Paul expressed respect for the faith of pagans when he was in Athens, and Aquinas did not hesitate to invoke Aristotle. There are “rays of truth” found in every religion; this is not a Vatican II innovation, but a statement of fact that no one can deny. And don’t give me that line about how “the Koran encourages violence”; have you ever read the Old Testament?
T
terillmorris
Guest
Mickey you clearly contradicted yourself, and anyone who is open minded can go back and read the posts and see it. Anyway, it doesnt maTTER, we disagree. You think JPII was a great Pope, I dont see any evidence of that at all. I think we both made our points. I think Assisi and some of his other actions were horrible, and potetionally scandalous. We agree to disagree. May God Bless you!!!
M
marchoi
Guest
First, to terillmorris:
I am quite disappointed with the tone you’ve taken in this thread. It is rather condescending and attacking - not something I expect from a seminarian, as you say you are. I agree that it seems as though Mickey contradicted himself, but to go ahead and say, “JOKE!!!” and demand that Mickey “apologize for his error”? Wow, doesn’t seem like the Christ-like love I was expecting…
Further, regarding the encyclicals… You first stated: “PLEASE CUT AND PASTE A DIRECT QUOTE ON SALVATION—DOES HE EVER MENTION HELL OR ETERNAL PERIL??? PLEASE CUT AND PASTE A DIRECT QUOTE FROM THOSE ENCYCLICALS.” You then further modified request with “I dont find any of them super strong on salvation.” But when Mickey did, you simply dismissed them: “You are preaching to the choir with your quotes from JPII. I never said he didnt make statments regarding salvation, and the Church’s necessity. I said that his statements werent very strong.”
Let me ask you this: if “salvation can only come from Jesus Christ” isn’t very strong, what is? Do you honestly think that the best way to convert is with a “Catholic Church or hell” approach? Don’t answer right now, give it a few hours.
To SemperFidelis:
Firstly, thank you for being quite civil in your presentation. However, I would like to ask a few questions regarding your quotes. I apologize in advance for the use of Wikipedia, but I’m afraid I don’t quite have the resources or the time to do a more thorough research.
My understanding is that Pope Pius XI (reign 1922-1939) condemned the idea of a “Christian federation” but rather stated that Protestant churches must return to the Catholic Church. And your quote seems to reflect that. But how does it apply to non-Christians? How can they return to something they never left? Wouldn’t it make more sense to take a more “toned-down” approach?
As for Pope Leo XIII (1878-1903), he makes it clear that not all religions are equal. Ok, seems to make sense. Now, I’m not really familiar with JPII & Assisi… But my question is: did JPII recognize other “religions” as valid or equal at Assisi by inviting them to pray with him? Did he make any clear indications (beyond reasonable doubt - gotta give the man some benefit of the doubt, I should think) to that effect?
Like I said, I’m not really informed about exactly what was said or what happened at Assisi. Perhaps if the above happened, yeah, I’d say that JPII made an error… but then again, who are we to judge his entire pontificate based on this instance?
In closing, I’d just like to think that we get be more civilized the way we go about discussion on these threads. And, sometimes we may have to “agree to disagree” - but the Catholic Church having within it the fullness of truth, I personally think that the “agree to disagree” mentality is too often a cop-out.
Our Lady of Humility, Pray for Us
I am quite disappointed with the tone you’ve taken in this thread. It is rather condescending and attacking - not something I expect from a seminarian, as you say you are. I agree that it seems as though Mickey contradicted himself, but to go ahead and say, “JOKE!!!” and demand that Mickey “apologize for his error”? Wow, doesn’t seem like the Christ-like love I was expecting…
Further, regarding the encyclicals… You first stated: “PLEASE CUT AND PASTE A DIRECT QUOTE ON SALVATION—DOES HE EVER MENTION HELL OR ETERNAL PERIL??? PLEASE CUT AND PASTE A DIRECT QUOTE FROM THOSE ENCYCLICALS.” You then further modified request with “I dont find any of them super strong on salvation.” But when Mickey did, you simply dismissed them: “You are preaching to the choir with your quotes from JPII. I never said he didnt make statments regarding salvation, and the Church’s necessity. I said that his statements werent very strong.”
Let me ask you this: if “salvation can only come from Jesus Christ” isn’t very strong, what is? Do you honestly think that the best way to convert is with a “Catholic Church or hell” approach? Don’t answer right now, give it a few hours.
To SemperFidelis:
Firstly, thank you for being quite civil in your presentation. However, I would like to ask a few questions regarding your quotes. I apologize in advance for the use of Wikipedia, but I’m afraid I don’t quite have the resources or the time to do a more thorough research.
My understanding is that Pope Pius XI (reign 1922-1939) condemned the idea of a “Christian federation” but rather stated that Protestant churches must return to the Catholic Church. And your quote seems to reflect that. But how does it apply to non-Christians? How can they return to something they never left? Wouldn’t it make more sense to take a more “toned-down” approach?
As for Pope Leo XIII (1878-1903), he makes it clear that not all religions are equal. Ok, seems to make sense. Now, I’m not really familiar with JPII & Assisi… But my question is: did JPII recognize other “religions” as valid or equal at Assisi by inviting them to pray with him? Did he make any clear indications (beyond reasonable doubt - gotta give the man some benefit of the doubt, I should think) to that effect?
Like I said, I’m not really informed about exactly what was said or what happened at Assisi. Perhaps if the above happened, yeah, I’d say that JPII made an error… but then again, who are we to judge his entire pontificate based on this instance?
In closing, I’d just like to think that we get be more civilized the way we go about discussion on these threads. And, sometimes we may have to “agree to disagree” - but the Catholic Church having within it the fullness of truth, I personally think that the “agree to disagree” mentality is too often a cop-out.
Our Lady of Humility, Pray for Us
T
terillmorris
Guest
You are a Catholic who doesnt seem to understand what true charity is. True charity sometimes means you have to say "mean, nasty " things as Jesus did in Luke 11. I actually do not think I was even close to being down right "fire and brimstone. " John Paul, in the encyclical you are refering to, quotes from Acts 4:12 , and he does talk about salvation only coming through Christ.(I agree -that is why i said preaching to the choir) What John PAul rarely, if ever, said was that formal membership in the Church is normatively necessary for salvation (almost all the other Popes did). This fact, accompanied by some of his questionable actions, leads me to be of the opinion that he set a bad example. That is my opinion, if you disagree fine.
As for the other stuff please lighten up. I
If we cant have fun here then we shouldnt be posting. Sorry if i offended anyone.
J
Jeanette_L
Guest
You believe, honestly that Jesus Christ was mean and nasty?
And you are a seminarian?Mean and nasty is not fun, for anyone but maybe the one who’s being mean.As for the other stuff please lighten up. I
I’m glad you recognized that it may have been offensive to some. It’s a great start.
T
terillmorris
Guest
Please!!! If you read what I wrote you would know that “mean” and “nasty” were in quotes. Jesus was “mean” and “nasty” if you read the Bible you will see that. (mean and nasty meaning he said the hard truths as well as the soft ones-)He even called people names. Look at Luke 11. Sorry, I read ALL OF JESUS’ WORDS not just the ones that make me feel good. GET WITH IT!!!You believe, honestly that Jesus Christ was mean and nasty?
Mean and nasty is not fun, for anyone but maybe the one who’s being mean.
I’m glad you recognized that it may have been offensive to some. It’s a great start.
T
terillmorris
Guest
By the way Jeanette, after reading your last post Saint Paul’s words in 1 Corinthians 14 came to mind,You believe, honestly that Jesus Christ was mean and nasty?
Mean and nasty is not fun, for anyone but maybe the one who’s being mean.
I’m glad you recognized that it may have been offensive to some. It’s a great start.
"
33: …As in all the churches of the saints, 34: the women should keep silence in the churches. For they are not permitted to speak, but should be subordinate, as even the law says. 35: If there is anything they desire to know, let them ask their husbands at home. For it is shameful for a woman to speak in church. 36: What! Did the word of God originate with you, or are you the only ones it has reached? 37: If any one thinks that he is a prophet, or spiritual, he should acknowledge that what I am writing to you is a command of the Lord. "
M
Mickey_Jackson
Guest
For the sake of your potential future parishioners, I hope you never become a priest. Terrill, you’ve crossed the line to the point where you are only insulting others for your own personal enjoyment.By the way Jeanette, after reading your last post Saint Paul’s words in 1 Corinthians 14 came to mind,
"
33: …As in all the churches of the saints, 34: the women should keep silence in the churches. For they are not permitted to speak, but should be subordinate, as even the law says. 35: If there is anything they desire to know, let them ask their husbands at home. For it is shameful for a woman to speak in church. 36: What! Did the word of God originate with you, or are you the only ones it has reached? 37: If any one thinks that he is a prophet, or spiritual, he should acknowledge that what I am writing to you is a command of the Lord. "
Do you think St. Paul would have told St. Catherine of Siena, St. Theresa of Avila, or St. Therese of Liseux to sit down and shut up? Your statement is a cop-out because you can’t think of a good way to actually answer Jeanette.
M
marchoi
Guest
“If I speak in human and angelic tongues but do not have love, I am a resounding gong or a clashing cymbal. And if I have the gift of prophecy and comprehend all mysteries and all knowledge; if I have all faith so as to move mountains but do not have love, I am nothing.” I think you know where that comes from. Perhaps you are right and I do not know much about charity. But I do not refer to whether you present the truth, but to the manner in which you choose to do it - that clearly lacks charity. Your approach would go up to a pregnant woman’s face and call her a sinner for coming to an abortion clinic, instead of approaching her with love. After all, “mean and nasty” is required sometimes, right? This is what Jesus would do?
Case in point:
Try saying that to St. Catherine of Siena, Doctor of the Church.By the way Jeanette, after reading your last post Saint Paul’s words in 1 Corinthians 14 came to mind,
"
33: …As in all the churches of the saints, 34: the women should keep silence in the churches. For they are not permitted to speak, but should be subordinate, as even the law says. 35: If there is anything they desire to know, let them ask their husbands at home. For it is shameful for a woman to speak in church. 36: What! Did the word of God originate with you, or are you the only ones it has reached? 37: If any one thinks that he is a prophet, or spiritual, he should acknowledge that what I am writing to you is a command of the Lord. "
First, these forums aren’t “for fun” - they are for edification. I don’t come here to bash other people, I come here to teach and to be taught. Even if these “having fun” is part of these forums, I hardly consider your posts “fun”. Further, your post to Jeannette does not reflect too well upon the sincerity of your last statement…As for the other stuff please lighten up. I
Bottom line is, is there a limit to what charity is, or at least how it is applied? It seems to me that you would say, “Yes.” Please correct me if I am wrong. I would think that above all, charity is the way to go - yes, charity doesn’t have to be always cuddly, but you can’t always chalk up lack of charity to “Well, charity is sometimes mean…” The last time I checked, love is patient and love is kind. Love is not pompous, jealous, rude, quick-tempered, etc. You get the point.
T
terillmorris
Guest
Calm down people and lighten up I was joking around with the Saint Paul quote. I dont always chalk up charity as “not always being cuddly”, but I do acknowledge that at time you need to be “mean” (at least that is what it would appear to some people) Again I ask you to read Luke 11 when Jesus blatantly called the Pharisees names.
S
stmaria
Guest
I believe that they have been heard. All of the rosaries said for peace have not been in vain. Without those prayers the world would have been devasted by war.Punishment for all of the worlds sins have been held back.How long have Christians and Jews been praying for peace?
Why haven’t they been heard yet?
JR
The problem I have with Assisi is that it put false religions on equal footing with the One True Religion. All religions were allowed to pray to their “god or gods” for peace. Not once but on two occasions.
It seems to me that the The First Commandment should be honored.
Pope Benedict just meet with leaders of all religons in New York. He accepted gifts from each religion. When he accepted the Quran he did not kiss it or hold it up. He simply thanked the Moslem and gave the book to one of the other priests. He did that with all of the gifts.
After his speech all of the religions were not allowed to “pray to their god or gods” for peace. Instead the song of St. Francis was sung by a choir.
vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/speeches/2008/april/documents/hf_ben-xvi_spe_20080417_other-religions_en.html
“The broader purpose of dialogue is to discover the truth. What is the origin and destiny of mankind? What are good and evil? What awaits us at the end of our earthly existence? Only by addressing these deeper questions can we build a solid basis for the peace and security of the human family, for “wherever and whenever men and women are enlightened by the splendor of truth, they naturally set out on the path of peace…Confronted with these deeper questions concerning the origin and destiny of mankind, Christianity proposes Jesus of Nazareth. He, we believe, is the eternal Logos who became flesh in order to reconcile man to God and reveal the underlying reason of all things. It is he whom we bring to the forum of interreligious dialogue. The ardent desire to follow in his footsteps spurs Christians to open their minds and hearts in dialogue”
T
terillmorris
Guest
We are getting off the subject a little bit. The real question or point is " Was Asssis a good thing" Was Assisi wrong or bad for the Church?" I believe it was. Many other traditional Catholics believe it was. I am sure you can come up with all kinds of defenses for it. Just like you can defend kissing the Koran, calling Buddhism “a great rich”, and many other things that John Paul did. The question is can you also come with just as many good reasons why he shouldnt have attended or called Assisi, kissed the Koran, called Budihsm a great rich of Asia, etc?? I think you can. Can you agree with JPII’s actions? Sure!! Can you disagree, but still be respectful to the Pope and the office? Yes!!. I believe those actions led many to dismiss converting other people to Catholicism. Therefore I dont think they were prudent. That is the point and the bottom line.
- Status