Our Country is Messed up Because We Don't Want Cattholic Leaders

[SpiritMeadow]

When it comes to the elements of our faith, we believe that we are the one, true Catholic and Apostolic Church. We believe that truth is immutable. If it was true 2000 years ago, it is true today. If it is true today, it will be true 2000 years from now. Truth is immutable, not relative. If I were in a faith that taught that scripture meant whatever a person thought it meant, well, you can see the many different variances of the so called truth. Again, relativism did not spring from the Catholic Church. Not to sound too harsh, but we will not change any of our teachings and dogmas which we believe to be infallible to accommodate anyone feeling welcome. You take us as we are, not as you want us to be.
Deacon Ed B

I tend to agree, but I would submit this: Although I agree that truth is truth, the ultra right wing of the Church tends to conclude that that truth was reached rather far back in history. I and many others contend that modern methods of exegesis have uncovered a better “truth” of what was actually said and meant. Scholars dispute a great deal of what is commonly thought of as Catholic dogma. They dispute it in the sense that deeper study using the appropriate tools developed by historians and literary specialists lead them to conclude that we have misunderstood a great deal of what was written. For example, no serious human being presented with the facts any longer believes that we are not the product of evolution. We do not believe in literal interpretations of genesis as accurate science or history.

So when you speak of truth, often it becomes at what point the church agreed with you. That becomes your truth and you draw the line. I speak of you of course generically. This forum focuses to an inordinate degree on issues of sex and sin. Jesus spent a good deal more time addressing real issues like poverty, and power, and condemned our continuing separation into them and us. The more i learn about the reality of what Jesus said and did, and what the apostles were trying to address in their various gospels, letters and such, the more I realize the deep import of the message, often nearly lost in the mistranslating, misunderstanding, nature of what has passed historically for exegesis.

 

[TLara]

The OP is some what correct. If we look at the abortion issue, as a Catholic we know that if you take birth control pills you are having abortions regularly. That is why the Catholic church is the only one not to allow birth control pills. Some protestant preachers will tell there congregation that abortion is bad but birth control pills are OK!!! what a lot of people fail to realize is that with birth control pills some times conception occurs and due to the increased hormones the fertilized egg is aborted. So some one who is really Pro-Life is one that does not use birth control, have abortions, is against the death penalty, and war. So if we elected some one who lives by what the catholic church teaches, the moral responsibility of America could be restored.

 

[Deacon_Ed_B]

For example, no serious human being presented with the facts any longer believes that we are not the product of evolution. We do not believe in literal interpretations of genesis as accurate science or history.

Your ignorance of dogma is showing. The issue of evolution is not addressed in Church dogma. Don’t confuse our belief that God created all that is, as saying that evolution does not exist. These two issues are not synonymous.

So when you speak of truth, often it becomes at what point the church agreed with you. That becomes your truth and you draw the line. I speak of you of course generically. This forum focuses to an inordinate degree on issues of sex and sin.

Do you or do you not believe that abortion is sin? What about each of the following: The practice of homosexuality, euthanasia, embryonic stem cell research, cloning. An answer to each one of these will let us know where you are coming from.

Jesus spent a good deal more time addressing real issues

Are you saying that these are not real issues to be concerned with?

like poverty, and power, and condemned our continuing separation into them and us. The more i learn about the reality of what Jesus said and did, and what the apostles were trying to address in their various gospels, letters and such, the more I realize the deep import of the message, often nearly lost in the mistranslating, misunderstanding, nature of what has passed historically for exegesis.

Please give examples of this
Deacon Ed B

 

[distracted]

. For example, no serious human being presented with the facts any longer believes that we are not the product of evolution. .

I am a “serious human being” who has been “presented” with many facts… and i DO NOT believe in evolution.

I believe that species evolve… but i do NOT believe that one species evolves into another… Or, even if that per chance could happen with animals, it does not happen with humans. In other words, apes do not evolve into human beings. God made humans in his image (they think, they can choose between good and evil, etc.)… not animals…

 

[SpiritMeadow]

Your ignorance of dogma is showing. The issue of evolution is not addressed in Church dogma. Don’t confuse our belief that God created all that is, as saying that evolution does not exist. These two issues are not synonymous.

Do you or do you not believe that abortion is sin? What about each of the following: The practice of homosexuality, euthanasia, embryonic stem cell research, cloning. An answer to each one of these will let us know where you are coming from.

Are you saying that these are not real issues to be concerned with?

Please give examples of this
Deacon Ed B

I am not confused about dogma at all. There are several people here on this forum that will tell you that the Church doesn’t allow for evolution by various papal documents. I tend to disagree, but whether true or not, evolution is an undoubted fact to all but the most terrified right winger. I believe that the Church has indeed spoken of evolution on a good many occasions and the CCC certainly has. References to the so-called required that Catholics must believe in a literal Adam and Eve are still argued, and most argue in favor of an actual Adam and Eve.

I believe abortion is the taking of a life which has the Spirit of God within. That is a personal belief. I have serious ethical issues with cloning. I have no personal opinion about euthanasia, it is a personal decision, the same with homosexuality,which is not a choice but a genetic disposition. I have no problem with embyonic stem cell research because these eggs are going to be destroyed in any case, better they can save a life like an cornea or other body part.

They are real issues, but most here make them nearly exclusive issues, beyond which they never have to go.

 

[rlg94086]

I am not confused about dogma at all. There are several people here on this forum that will tell you that the Church doesn’t allow for evolution by various papal documents. I tend to disagree, but whether true or not, evolution is an undoubted fact to all but the most terrified right winger. I believe that the Church has indeed spoken of evolution on a good many occasions and the CCC certainly has. References to the so-called required that Catholics must believe in a literal Adam and Eve are still argued, and most argue in favor of an actual Adam and Eve.

I believe abortion is the taking of a life which has the Spirit of God within. That is a personal belief. I have serious ethical issues with cloning. I have no personal opinion about euthanasia, it is a personal decision, the same with homosexuality,which is not a choice but a genetic disposition. I have no problem with embyonic stem cell research because these eggs are going to be destroyed in any case, better they can save a life like an cornea or other body part.

They are real issues, but most here make them nearly exclusive issues, beyond which they never have to go.

How do you choose which Catholic beliefs to accept and which to reject? What do you believe are the minimum beliefs to accept as a Catholic? Where does one cross the line and become an apostate?

To me, it does seem that you are confused about dogma.

BTW…embryos are not “eggs.” If they were, there would be no problem in using them for stem cell research.

 

[distracted]

Does anyone here know much about the history of Mexico?

I read some stuff recently and it blew me away - all the bloodshed… rebels fighting the government… governments that don’t allow the Church to practice… This was in the 1800s, early 1900s…

I’m going to continue studying… but reading about all the wars is making me almost physically ill…

 

[Deacon_Ed_B]

I tend to agree, but I would submit this: Although I agree that truth is truth, the ultra right wing of the Church tends to conclude that that truth was reached rather far back in history. I and many others contend that modern methods of exegesis have uncovered a better “truth” of what was actually said and meant. Scholars dispute a great deal of what is commonly thought of as Catholic dogma. They dispute it in the sense that deeper study using the appropriate tools developed by historians and literary specialists lead them to conclude that we have misunderstood a great deal of what was written. For example, no serious human being presented with the facts any longer believes that we are not the product of evolution. We do not believe in literal interpretations of genesis as accurate science or history.

So when you speak of truth, often it becomes at what point the church agreed with you. That becomes your truth and you draw the line. I speak of you of course generically. This forum focuses to an inordinate degree on issues of sex and sin. Jesus spent a good deal more time addressing real issues like poverty, and power, and condemned our continuing separation into them and us. The more i learn about the reality of what Jesus said and did, and what the apostles were trying to address in their various gospels, letters and such, the more I realize the deep import of the message, often nearly lost in the mistranslating, misunderstanding, nature of what has passed historically for exegesis.

I do not mean to sound flippant, but I could care less what so called scholars debate about the truthfulness of our Dogma. There is no better truth than that taught by the Church founded by Jesus Christ and which has continued with unbroken apostolic succession. It is a Church which holds the promise of the guidance of the Holy Spirit. I will take his guidance rather than that of so called “experts”. From what you have pointed out, there is a great misunderstanding, but it is not on our part, It is by unguided and ill informed individuals who presume to know more than the Holy Spirit and his guidance. It is not the Church that agrees with me, but me that agrees with the Church. I will keep you in my prayers for your enlightenment.
Deacon Ed B

 

[elt1956]

Does anyone here know much about the history of Mexico?

I read some stuff recently and it blew me away - all the bloodshed… rebels fighting the government… governments that don’t allow the Church to practice… This was in the 1800s, early 1900s…

I’m going to continue studying… but reading about all the wars is making me almost physically ill…

Hi. Haven’t read a lot about the history of Mexico. Have heard some stories. The violence of Mexican history does shade my opinion about the government of Mexico not taking care of their own and expecting tax paying citizens of the US to do it for them. There is a form of injustice in that, I think. Peace.

 

[elt1956]

Does anyone here know much about the history of Mexico?

I read some stuff recently and it blew me away - all the bloodshed… rebels fighting the government… governments that don’t allow the Church to practice… This was in the 1800s, early 1900s…

I’m going to continue studying… but reading about all the wars is making me almost physically ill…

I do not mean to sound flippant, but I could care less what so called scholars debate about the truthfulness of our Dogma. There is no better truth than that taught by the Church founded by Jesus Christ and which has continued with unbroken apostolic succession. It is a Church which holds the promise of the guidance of the Holy Spirit. I will take his guidance rather than that of so called “experts”. From what you have pointed out, there is a great misunderstanding, but it is not on our part, It is by unguided and ill informed individuals who presume to know more than the Holy Spirit and his guidance. It is not the Church that agrees with me, but me that agrees with the Church. I will keep you in my prayers for your enlightenment.
Deacon Ed B

Dear Deac. I don’t mean to be flippant either, REALLY, but when you write about the Holy Spirit’s guidance, do you mean only Catholic church is guided by the Holy Spirit? Can not individuals who may, or may not, belong to the Roman Catholic Church be guided by the Holy Spirit? Peace.

 

[Deacon_Ed_B]

Dear Deac. I don’t mean to be flippant either, REALLY, but when you write about the Holy Spirit’s guidance, do you mean only Catholic church is guided by the Holy Spirit? Can not individuals who may, or may not, belong to the Roman Catholic Church be guided by the Holy Spirit? Peace.

I am not saying they cannot be. What I am saying is that the Catholic Church is the only Church that has the promise of the Holy Spirit, which guidance promises to be with us always and that the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. The Bible does not give this promise to any individual or any other church. If it did, why are there so many protestant denominations springing up daily. Certainly you cannot say that they are all true or correct. If you do, you are steeped in relativism.
Deacon Ed B

 

[Deacon_Ed_B]

Let me add a post script to my reply. The Holy Spirit can guide individuals. That said, if whatever they believe the Holy Spirit is telling them, contradicts the teaching of the Catholic Church, then I would question what spirit is guiding that individual. I say this because truth is one, singular and immutable. As such, the Holy Spirit cannot contradict itself.
Deacon Ed B

 

[elt1956]

I am not saying they cannot be. What I am saying is that the Catholic Church is the only Church that has the promise of the Holy Spirit, which guidance promises to be with us always and that the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. The Bible does not give this promise to any individual or any other church. If it did, why are there so many protestant denominations springing up daily. Certainly you cannot say that they are all true or correct. If you do, you are steeped in relativism.
Deacon Ed B

Hello, beating a dead horse here, but when Christ said, “I am with you always”, do you think that should be interpreted to mean only the Church, or also individuals? If only the Church, where is the consolation of a personal God? Thanks. Peace.

 

[Deacon_Ed_B]

God is not a personal God. The concept of a personal God leads one to believe that as long as he thinks he or she is doing God’s will then they are OK. The problem here is that many people may think this and are not in unison. This is relativism. He is God of all. Our relationship with God is not me and God, rather it is with us, the congregation, the people collectively and God, with the Church established by Jesus. . Can I personally be holy, ;and seek him in all that I do and pray fervently. Of course. But Jesus, who is God, came and established his Church which is the Catholic Church. Not any other. We are the only one that has had the promise of the guidance of the Holy Spirit. This Church and none other.
Deacon Ed B

 

[East_and_West]

Hello, beating a dead horse here, but when Christ said, “I am with you always”, do you think that should be interpreted to mean only the Church, or also individuals? If only the Church, where is the consolation of a personal God? Thanks. Peace.

He spoke these words to his disciples upon whom he founded the Catholic Church. Thus he was speaking in Catholic terms to Catholics. Can you really say you are a true disciple of Christ if you are not a member of his intended audience when he spoke these words, if you are not a Catholic who is faithful to his Church?

 

[elt1956]

God is not a personal God. The concept of a personal God leads one to believe that as long as he thinks he or she is doing God’s will then they are OK. The problem here is that many people may think this and are not in unison. This is relativism. He is God of all. Our relationship with God is not me and God, rather it is with us, the congregation, the people collectively and God, with the Church established by Jesus. . Can I personally be holy, ;and seek him in all that I do and pray fervently. Of course. But Jesus, who is God, came and established his Church which is the Catholic Church. Not any other. We are the only one that has had the promise of the guidance of the Holy Spirit. This Church and none other.
Deacon Ed B

Why do we ask God to watch over our loved ones, to keep them safe, bodily and spiritually? Why do we ask God to help others? Then why do we as individuals pray for the sick and dying? Why do we pray at all if we think God is not going to hear and help us? Is that not praying to a personal God? Do you not believe that God holds each soul created as special? I do believe any doctrine given ex cathedra by the Pope is where the guidance of the Holy Spirit comes to play. But I do believe I can talk to God and I will be heard. I may not be answered in the way I would like, but I will be heard. If that is Relativism, then so be it. I have also believed for many years that if Christ came to inspect His church now, He would not recognize it. Peace.

 

[SpiritMeadow]

I am a “serious human being” who has been “presented” with many facts… and i DO NOT believe in evolution.

I believe that species evolve… but i do NOT believe that one species evolves into another… Or, even if that per chance could happen with animals, it does not happen with humans. In other words, apes do not evolve into human beings. God made humans in his image (they think, they can choose between good and evil, etc.)… not animals…

You may believe as you wish. The facts are the facts and the facts are that no serious minds on this planet don’t believe in evolution of the man from lower forms of life. You may pander to wacko science sites to support your need to believe otherwise, but it changes nothing. You are alone with a small segment of bible thumpers from the south. This argument is virtually unknown in other parts of the world. Evolution is the basis for dozens of other scientific disciplines. You cannot explain how this hoax has been maintained for over 150 years. You cannot explain how literally millions of scientists have knowingly wasted their careers knowing they were contributing to an untruth. You need to believe this because you fear how the truth might impact your faith. That is the result of your lack of faith rather than your steadfast adherence to a doctrine that the Church no longer follows. Believe as you wish, you convince zero thinking people, but only the rest of the frightened uninformed folks who suffer from lack of education and common sense.

 

[SpiritMeadow]

How do you choose which Catholic beliefs to accept and which to reject? What do you believe are the minimum beliefs to accept as a Catholic? Where does one cross the line and become an apostate?

To me, it does seem that you are confused about dogma.

BTW…embryos are not “eggs.” If they were, there would be no problem in using them for stem cell research.

Plenty of people here will be happy to tell you when you are no longer Catholic. It tends to be when you cross their line.

If it pleases you to believe I don’t understand Church dogma, fine,

Of course embryos aren’t eggs, but oddly I guess a serious right winger could make an argument that they too are sacred and only to be kept in availability for possible fertilization. I guess that line is a little blurry huh?

 

[SpiritMeadow]

I do not mean to sound flippant, but I could care less what so called scholars debate about the truthfulness of our Dogma. There is no better truth than that taught by the Church founded by Jesus Christ and which has continued with unbroken apostolic succession. It is a Church which holds the promise of the guidance of the Holy Spirit. I will take his guidance rather than that of so called “experts”. From what you have pointed out, there is a great misunderstanding, but it is not on our part, It is by unguided and ill informed individuals who presume to know more than the Holy Spirit and his guidance. It is not the Church that agrees with me, but me that agrees with the Church. I will keep you in my prayers for your enlightenment.
Deacon Ed B

LOL…I don’t mean to be flippant either, but scholars by and large are the definers of what is dogma. They write it, they explain it. It does not appear magically.

You may believe that we have an “unbroken” line of apostolic succession. Even Catholic scholars say otherwise. You may of course believe whatever you wish.

I shall pray that you read a little something that does not start with the imprimatur as its first words. I shall pray for your enlightenment.

 

[SpiritMeadow]

Let me add a post script to my reply. The Holy Spirit can guide individuals. That said, if whatever they believe the Holy Spirit is telling them, contradicts the teaching of the Catholic Church, then I would question what spirit is guiding that individual. I say this because truth is one, singular and immutable. As such, the Holy Spirit cannot contradict itself.
Deacon Ed B

Do you see what you do? You set up a situation where the Church can never be wrong. Please don’t let this get out. America will never elect a Catholic again! Convenient arguments that make your world tidy are not good thinking nor good argument. YOu make the Church perfect by definition. This is simply the kind of talk one would hear from any demogogue, I am the emperor, the emperor cannot be wrong, I cannot be wrong. Therefore, if you disagree, you must be. Self-serving, adn quite convenient. Maturity requires a thinking human mind, not a robot.