dawgball said:
Thanks. I haven't held back any opinion, but perhaps would normally frame it in a different manner.
NEW POPE
- Thread starter wareagle
- Start date
Thanks. I haven't held back any opinion, but perhaps would normally frame it in a different manner.
Dawgball, If I might stick my nose in, I think you have a pretty good understanding of the faith. While you and I are very devoted Catholics, we will very on opinion. I agree with most of your opinions but not all. As I can see in your post, you understand the true meaning of the Holy Spirit at work in your life and belief. That is a true blessing and your ahead of the curve in understanding your own faith. More modern countries like ours try to reason away sin and look for religion to conform to their way of life and thinking. This individualism sometimes goes too far and thus you have people breaking away from their faith, looking for someplace else to go that condones their actions. You have to wonder if people want God to do as they want, or are they willing to do what God wants. I'm not saying that the Catholic Church is always right as I too have trouble with some of their stances, but that is where we wrestles with our faith and try to come to a true understanding about what God truly wants for us. Keep the faith brother!
Kosar, I had posted my last comments before I read yours. I understand what you are saying. That particular statement you are refering too was wrong to state in my opinion. I think the Church should never turn anyone away from Eucharist or communion. Did Jesus ever tell anyone to get lost because they were a sinner? In fact, those were the people Jesus sought out. Receiving communion is a moment of grace and draws us nearer to Christ in the Catholic faith. Everyone is welcome to draw nearer and nobody should be told no, no matter what their sin, because we all are sinners. On the other hand, the Church is the spokeperson for those with no voice, such as the unborn. It will always make statements in favor of life, as opposed to death which is what our culture is leaning towards. Allowing abortion, death penalty and euthenasia says it is OK to kill. The Church will always argue against these things.
Fact is that Catholic doctrine is that you cannot take communion if you take positions on "significant issues" that are contrary to the church, like abortion. I do not pretend to be the world's most knowledable or devote Catholic, but the rules are the rules. It is our choice whether we wish to belong to the Church. it is not the Church's role to change its tenents to conform with what everyone else wants. Adultery is not frowned on now as it once was, so should the Church just decide to blow off that Commandment? Someone like Kerry has a choice to decide which value is more important to him. If he is that strong on a pro-choice stance, the fact is he is NOT a true Catholic, and rather than griping about the church and the Vatican and playing politics he should have looked for a new Church down the street. We may all disagree with the Church on issues, but in the end if we are following our faith we are to follow regardless.
Sun Tzu said:
Right. But what about if you simply vote for somebody who isn't a staunch pro-lifer. In this guys own words, you are guilty of 'cooperation of evil' and 'not worthy of communion.' Well, how many degrees of separation does one need to be from moderate pro-choice elements? Is that in the Bible somewhere that you can't vote for a Pro-Choicer if you want to be considered a Catholic? If not, who was the first to make this up?
Yes, rules are rules, and they have changed quite a bit over time. Has the Bible changed or are these popes having 3-way conference calls with Jesus and God every so often?
pirate fan said:
I think that's a pretty good way of looking at things.
As an aside, and I definitely don't want to politicize this thing, but not sure how one can reconcile this guy urging Catholics to vote for somebody who put more people in the electric chair in Texas than about the other 49 states combined during that period. That is, since the church 'always' argues against the death penalty.
Maybe they should just stay the hell out of it.
I've read that the Catholic Church, in the wake of all the negative publicity of recent years concerning priest molestations, stances on birth control, celibacy etc. has consulted with various Christian public relation firms in an effort to boost membership, attendance at mass and to reign in all those Catholics that have left the Church.
In actuality, it was the pr firms decision to elect a 78 year old pope since the Church received much needed positive publicity surrounding John Pauls death, and the subsequent election of the new pope with all its secrecy and grandeur. In this fashion, the Church can get more free positive publicity in the next few years assuming the new guy kicks relatively soon instead of waiting 20 + years.
I further read that this same pr firm is already planning the next election of Benedicts successor. However, the format will be different. Instead of a secret conclave, and in a further effort to boost membership and positivie publicity, the Catholic Church has sold the rights to televise the next conclave.
The article went on to state that ABC the successful bidder, has decided on a different format for Benedicts successors election. He will be elected on American Idol with a worldwide call in so that all Catholics can vote for their favorite cardinal. The cardinals will vie for the papacy by fielding questions from the panel relating to church dogma, canon law and US Presidents. In addition, there will be a talent aspect of the competition.
I can hear Simon saying to one of the contestants:
"You call that a miter?"
Fox also bid for the rights but lost out. There concept was to have the successor cardinal elected at a tribal counsel with the name of the series: Survivor Vatican. One of the pilots showed the cardinals on an island with nothing to eat but hot dogs on Fridays during lent. You should see the infighting amongst the men in red.
Well got to go,
Yours in Christ,
Eddie
In actuality, it was the pr firms decision to elect a 78 year old pope since the Church received much needed positive publicity surrounding John Pauls death, and the subsequent election of the new pope with all its secrecy and grandeur. In this fashion, the Church can get more free positive publicity in the next few years assuming the new guy kicks relatively soon instead of waiting 20 + years.
I further read that this same pr firm is already planning the next election of Benedicts successor. However, the format will be different. Instead of a secret conclave, and in a further effort to boost membership and positivie publicity, the Catholic Church has sold the rights to televise the next conclave.
The article went on to state that ABC the successful bidder, has decided on a different format for Benedicts successors election. He will be elected on American Idol with a worldwide call in so that all Catholics can vote for their favorite cardinal. The cardinals will vie for the papacy by fielding questions from the panel relating to church dogma, canon law and US Presidents. In addition, there will be a talent aspect of the competition.
I can hear Simon saying to one of the contestants:
"You call that a miter?"
Fox also bid for the rights but lost out. There concept was to have the successor cardinal elected at a tribal counsel with the name of the series: Survivor Vatican. One of the pilots showed the cardinals on an island with nothing to eat but hot dogs on Fridays during lent. You should see the infighting amongst the men in red.
Well got to go,
Yours in Christ,
Eddie
Obviously the Bible hasnt changed. the rule is, for better or worse, you follow what the Church says. Which, at least in theory, is divined from the holy spirit.
Would be kind of odd for John Kerry to say that the US Constitution allows abortions even though not mentioned in any way, but also state that because the Bible doesnt explicitly preclude abortion he shouldnt be denied communion.
Would be kind of odd for John Kerry to say that the US Constitution allows abortions even though not mentioned in any way, but also state that because the Bible doesnt explicitly preclude abortion he shouldnt be denied communion.
kosar said:
No the Bible doesn't change but the world does. people were excommunicated from the Church for reason that looking back were just flat out wrong. Gallilleo is an example as he discover things, people couldn't accept it and the Church kicked him out. Many years later we know he was right, so the Church was at fault. As science and divine revelation (God speaking to us today) we discover more about God. The Bible doesn't have all the answers but is the base to work from as we face new issues in the modern world, like cloning. Also as I have said before, the Church is full of humans, prone to making mistakes. I could give you hundreds of major blunders over history. This is not a perfect institution and never will be. The Church is a source of guidence, along with eachs persons own responsibility to form their conscience for doing what is right. I don't think anyone should follow anything blindly, and that includes the Church.
Eddie, it is great to see you!, love the response, I miss your sense of wit.
For all his faults, George bush didnt execute anyone. He didnt sit on any juries either, nor was he a prosecutor or Attorney General. It is true, however, he would ahve the right to stay an execution, but it is also his duty to uphold the law. The law in Texas is a stay should only be given with evidence of innocence.
Regardless, the Catholic Church wasnt backing either guy, as the Vatican is no fan of GW. But it is true alot of Catholics were. Problem is, neither one is a "true Catholic platform." Not sure either is close even. But I think we would have to agree that GW in the "Catholic view" is the lesser evil.
Regardless, the Catholic Church wasnt backing either guy, as the Vatican is no fan of GW. But it is true alot of Catholics were. Problem is, neither one is a "true Catholic platform." Not sure either is close even. But I think we would have to agree that GW in the "Catholic view" is the lesser evil.
- Feb 12, 2000
- 10,652
- 39
- 48
- 50
Eddie-- where you been? i miss your wit.
kosar--there are several items that are being discussed.
This is one that I disagree with and I think they are taking too strong of a stance on a political election. I know many Catholics look to the Vatican for GUIDANCE but this is much more than guidance. This brings the guilt factor in as you stated.
Another topic: receiving Communion. This is something that many people have a problem with the Catholic faith. Catholics believe that the Eucharist is not a symbol but the ACTUAL body of Christ. The Catholic church refuses to present Communion to non-Catholics because they don't feel the same way. I understand the reasoning for this.
And the conference calls were 4-way, my mic was just muted.
kosar--there are several items that are being discussed.
This is one that I disagree with and I think they are taking too strong of a stance on a political election. I know many Catholics look to the Vatican for GUIDANCE but this is much more than guidance. This brings the guilt factor in as you stated.
Another topic: receiving Communion. This is something that many people have a problem with the Catholic faith. Catholics believe that the Eucharist is not a symbol but the ACTUAL body of Christ. The Catholic church refuses to present Communion to non-Catholics because they don't feel the same way. I understand the reasoning for this.
And the conference calls were 4-way, my mic was just muted.
PF:
Wit? It's true. The Church realized that in order to compete against the evangelicals (a la Jerry Falwell, Bob Jones, Billy Graham, Tom Delay, etc.) whose numbers have been growing, Holy Mother Church needed a new direction. Some of the cardinals are doing a talk radio circuit planning appearances on Imus, Rush Limbaugh, Howard Stern and Jerry Springer.
One of the Springer shows is entitled "Altar boys gone Wild." I heard Dr. Freeze will be on that show.
Dominus Vobiscum,
Eddie
Wit? It's true. The Church realized that in order to compete against the evangelicals (a la Jerry Falwell, Bob Jones, Billy Graham, Tom Delay, etc.) whose numbers have been growing, Holy Mother Church needed a new direction. Some of the cardinals are doing a talk radio circuit planning appearances on Imus, Rush Limbaugh, Howard Stern and Jerry Springer.
One of the Springer shows is entitled "Altar boys gone Wild." I heard Dr. Freeze will be on that show.
Dominus Vobiscum,
Eddie
dawgball, it was me that said the pope/vatican/catholic leadership were out of touch with their followers, and I still think that is accurate.
Many Catholic beliefs are born from tradition and not scripture. I could name off numerous things practiced in Catholicism that I can't find a scriptural reference for. Why is that?
Like dawgball said (paraphrased from other discussions), ask 10 practiciing catholics their opinion or understanding about a topic and get 10 different answers.
I guess I'll side with the atheists/agnostics on this. I don't really care who the pope is as it affects me and my faith in no way, shape, or form. My choice would have been an African or a South American. A German?? 78?? I guess I'd have to be a Catholic to understand that choice!
Every time I see the Pope or bishops in their fine regalia I think, gee, wonder how many third worlders could have been fed for the price of that getup. Why is that necessary? I saw the guy who has the family business in the vatican for outfitting the Pope and bishops. I'd hate to think how many thousands of dollars go towards those silly costumes.
The nuns are the ones that I see doing the most for ones who are need. I have met a few in my life (one who worked in Brazil and one who worked in Haiti) who did tremendous things for downtrodden people. Folks like that are the ones whos should be praised and appreciated more.
Last comment before I offend everybody (not intended, just my candid thoughts). I think with PJP's passing there has been way too much deification. He was not God. He was not Jesus. He was a man and a sinner like us all.
Many Catholic beliefs are born from tradition and not scripture. I could name off numerous things practiced in Catholicism that I can't find a scriptural reference for. Why is that?
Like dawgball said (paraphrased from other discussions), ask 10 practiciing catholics their opinion or understanding about a topic and get 10 different answers.
I guess I'll side with the atheists/agnostics on this. I don't really care who the pope is as it affects me and my faith in no way, shape, or form. My choice would have been an African or a South American. A German?? 78?? I guess I'd have to be a Catholic to understand that choice!
Every time I see the Pope or bishops in their fine regalia I think, gee, wonder how many third worlders could have been fed for the price of that getup. Why is that necessary? I saw the guy who has the family business in the vatican for outfitting the Pope and bishops. I'd hate to think how many thousands of dollars go towards those silly costumes.
The nuns are the ones that I see doing the most for ones who are need. I have met a few in my life (one who worked in Brazil and one who worked in Haiti) who did tremendous things for downtrodden people. Folks like that are the ones whos should be praised and appreciated more.
Last comment before I offend everybody (not intended, just my candid thoughts). I think with PJP's passing there has been way too much deification. He was not God. He was not Jesus. He was a man and a sinner like us all.
- Feb 12, 2000
- 10,652
- 39
- 48
- 50
A couple of thoughts...
Completely agree about Pope JP being raised a little too high, but that's how our media and in your face communication works now. I think it's a shame, but oh well.
This is true with just about any large organization. If you are a member of an organized church, I would be willing to bet that this holds true even with one congregation.
I'm not the reference here. I am sure if you asked the right person they could give you the some rationale whether you or I agree or not.
I somewhat disagree because noone should take a life with the cloth for praise. But I do see your point. The mainstream media doesn't want to put that much effort into getting a story, though. Nuns usually are not working close enough to a plush hotel!
I also see what you're saying here, but the Catholic church does quite a bit for those countries. You could question any organization to the Nth degree, or you could point out how much the Church does instead. Glass half full...
Completely agree about Pope JP being raised a little too high, but that's how our media and in your face communication works now. I think it's a shame, but oh well.
This is true with just about any large organization. If you are a member of an organized church, I would be willing to bet that this holds true even with one congregation.
I'm not the reference here. I am sure if you asked the right person they could give you the some rationale whether you or I agree or not.
I somewhat disagree because noone should take a life with the cloth for praise. But I do see your point. The mainstream media doesn't want to put that much effort into getting a story, though. Nuns usually are not working close enough to a plush hotel!
I also see what you're saying here, but the Catholic church does quite a bit for those countries. You could question any organization to the Nth degree, or you could point out how much the Church does instead. Glass half full...
- Feb 12, 2000
- 10,652
- 39
- 48
- 50
forgot one quote -- lol -- My opinion remains the same that the Catholic church is what it is. If someone finds their values not in line with the main principles of the church as a whole, they may need to find another religion that fits their value system better. The Catholic church should absolutely not change with the wind, though, to fit in with current (mostly American) values.
...certinaly don't mean to offend anyone here, but just thought this was a good thread to throw in this bit by George Carlin.... 
"Catholics -- which I was until I reached the age of reason -- Catholics and other Christians are against abortions, and they're against homosexuals. Well who has less abortions than homosexuals? Leave these fawking people alone, for Christ sakes! Here is an entire class of people guaranteed never to have an abortion, and the Catholics and Christians are just tossing them aside! You'd think they'd make natural allies. Go look for consistency in religion. And speaking of my friends, the Catholics, when John Cardinal O'Connor of New York, and some of these other Cardinals and Bishops have experienced their first pregnancies and their first labor pains, and they've raised a couple of children on minimum wage, then I'll be glad to hear what they have to say about abortion. I'm sure it will be interesting and enlightening . . .
"But you know, the longer you listen to this abortion debate, the more you hear this phrase 'sanctity of life.'" You've heard that, 'sanctity of life.'" You believe in it? Personally, I think it's a bunch of sh!t. Well I mean, life is sacred? Who said so? God? Hey if you read history, you realize that God is one of the leading causes of death, has been for thousands of years. Hindus, Muslims, Jews, Christians, all taking turns killing each other because God told them it was a good idea. The sword of God, the blood of the lamb, vengeance is mine, millions of dead mother****ers, all because they gave the wrong answer to the God question.
'You belive in God?'
'No.'
*BANG* Dead.
'You belive in God?'
'Yes.'
'You belive in my God?'
'No.'
*Bang* Dead.
'My God has a bigger dick than your God!' That's how it is, isn't it? Thousands of years, and all the best wars too, the bloodiest, most brutal wars fought all based on religious hatred, which is fine with me. Anytime a bunch of holy people want to kill each other I'm a happy guy. But don't be giving me all this sh!t about the sanctity of life. I mean, even if there were such a thing, I don't think it's something you can blame on God. No, you know where the sanctity of life came from? We made it up! You know why? Cause we're alive! Self-interest. Living people have a strong interest in promoting the idea that somehow life is sacred. You don't see Abbott and Costello running around, talking about this sh!t, do you? We're not hearing a whole lot from Mussolini on the subject. What's the latest from JFK? Not a god damned thing, cause JFK, Mussolini, and Abbott and Costello are fawking dead. They're fawking dead, and dead people give less than a sh!t about the sanctity of life. Only living people care about it, so the whole thing grows out of a completely biased point of view. It's a self-serving, man-made bullsh!t story. It's one of these things we tell ourselves so we'll feel noble. Life is sacred, makes you feel noble. Well let me ask you this, if everything that ever lived is dead, and everything alive is going to die, where does the sacred part come in? I'm having trouble with that. Because even with the stuff we preach about the sanctity of life, we don't practice it. Look at what we kill. Mosquitos and flies, because they're pests! Lions and tigers, because it's fun! Chickens and pigs, because we're hungry. Pheasants and quayle, because it's fun, and we're hungry. And people! We kill people, because they're pests . . . and it's fun! And you might have noticed something else, the sanctity of life doesn't seem to apply to cancer cells, does it? You never see a bumpersticker that says 'save the tumors' or 'I brake for advanced melanoma.' No, viruses, mold, mildew, maggots, fungus, weeds, e. coli bacteria, the crabs, nothing sacred about those things. So at best, the sanctity of life is kind of a selective thing. We get to choose which forms of life we feel are sacred, and we get to kill the rest. Pretty neat deal, huh? You know how we got it? We made the whole fawking thing up! Made it up, the same way we made up the death penalty. We made them both up, the sanctity of life and the death penalty. Aren't we versatile?!"
-From George Carlin, "Back In Town."
p.s. For all of your *really* serious folks out there...calm down. I just thought it was fawking funny.
"Catholics -- which I was until I reached the age of reason -- Catholics and other Christians are against abortions, and they're against homosexuals. Well who has less abortions than homosexuals? Leave these fawking people alone, for Christ sakes! Here is an entire class of people guaranteed never to have an abortion, and the Catholics and Christians are just tossing them aside! You'd think they'd make natural allies. Go look for consistency in religion. And speaking of my friends, the Catholics, when John Cardinal O'Connor of New York, and some of these other Cardinals and Bishops have experienced their first pregnancies and their first labor pains, and they've raised a couple of children on minimum wage, then I'll be glad to hear what they have to say about abortion. I'm sure it will be interesting and enlightening . . .
"But you know, the longer you listen to this abortion debate, the more you hear this phrase 'sanctity of life.'" You've heard that, 'sanctity of life.'" You believe in it? Personally, I think it's a bunch of sh!t. Well I mean, life is sacred? Who said so? God? Hey if you read history, you realize that God is one of the leading causes of death, has been for thousands of years. Hindus, Muslims, Jews, Christians, all taking turns killing each other because God told them it was a good idea. The sword of God, the blood of the lamb, vengeance is mine, millions of dead mother****ers, all because they gave the wrong answer to the God question.
'You belive in God?'
'No.'
*BANG* Dead.
'You belive in God?'
'Yes.'
'You belive in my God?'
'No.'
*Bang* Dead.
'My God has a bigger dick than your God!' That's how it is, isn't it? Thousands of years, and all the best wars too, the bloodiest, most brutal wars fought all based on religious hatred, which is fine with me. Anytime a bunch of holy people want to kill each other I'm a happy guy. But don't be giving me all this sh!t about the sanctity of life. I mean, even if there were such a thing, I don't think it's something you can blame on God. No, you know where the sanctity of life came from? We made it up! You know why? Cause we're alive! Self-interest. Living people have a strong interest in promoting the idea that somehow life is sacred. You don't see Abbott and Costello running around, talking about this sh!t, do you? We're not hearing a whole lot from Mussolini on the subject. What's the latest from JFK? Not a god damned thing, cause JFK, Mussolini, and Abbott and Costello are fawking dead. They're fawking dead, and dead people give less than a sh!t about the sanctity of life. Only living people care about it, so the whole thing grows out of a completely biased point of view. It's a self-serving, man-made bullsh!t story. It's one of these things we tell ourselves so we'll feel noble. Life is sacred, makes you feel noble. Well let me ask you this, if everything that ever lived is dead, and everything alive is going to die, where does the sacred part come in? I'm having trouble with that. Because even with the stuff we preach about the sanctity of life, we don't practice it. Look at what we kill. Mosquitos and flies, because they're pests! Lions and tigers, because it's fun! Chickens and pigs, because we're hungry. Pheasants and quayle, because it's fun, and we're hungry. And people! We kill people, because they're pests . . . and it's fun! And you might have noticed something else, the sanctity of life doesn't seem to apply to cancer cells, does it? You never see a bumpersticker that says 'save the tumors' or 'I brake for advanced melanoma.' No, viruses, mold, mildew, maggots, fungus, weeds, e. coli bacteria, the crabs, nothing sacred about those things. So at best, the sanctity of life is kind of a selective thing. We get to choose which forms of life we feel are sacred, and we get to kill the rest. Pretty neat deal, huh? You know how we got it? We made the whole fawking thing up! Made it up, the same way we made up the death penalty. We made them both up, the sanctity of life and the death penalty. Aren't we versatile?!"
-From George Carlin, "Back In Town."
p.s. For all of your *really* serious folks out there...calm down. I just thought it was fawking funny.
Great post, Taoist. Carlin's rants about religion often make far more sense than a comedy routine should. I remember watching him on HBO one time, and he did a bit on the 10 commandments, and damn if it didn't ring true. Particularly the part about "thou shalt not kill."
six five, I would be curious about some of those traditions you feel have no scriptural basis. I'm not saying that isn't the case, but I think it is probably fewer than you believe.
