Posted on 06/02/2013 1:04:38 PM PDT by annalex
A good interpretation, and I think Our Lord - and certainly Our Lady - understand.
Still not wrong...
Yes. This shows that while it is important and even vital to have a cultural identity, it is also important to have the right identity. The purpose of any nation is like any family to lead her children to Christ, not merely to have identity.
Read “Atlas Shrugged” if you haven’t, it is the source of the quote. You’ll love it.
> agnostic? That is a shame. No rational man should be.
Agnostic; Noun
A person who believes that nothing is known or can be known of the existence or nature of God or of anything beyond material phenomena.
Being an Agnostic would not preclude having faith in something or someone that has not manifested materially.
The original Mass was in Greek in the East, — we don’t know whether it was in Latin form the very start in the West. English today has sufficient power to express the thoughts of the Gospel. I, too, regret many things about Vatican II but I would not put forth the abandonment of Latin as the foremost complaint.
Existence of God is certainly provable. The physical universe proves existence of the Father; the Gospels prove the salvific power of Christ, and the two thousand years of the Catholic Church prove the existence and power of the Holy Ghost. The problem of agnosticism is not the lack of proofs, but the lack of faith in assessing the evidence in front of them.
That is not what it says.
Yes, exactly. Agnosticism is a superstition, in other words.
I know all that...it was a joke. Yes, the gospels were in greek, sometimes with aramaic words included.
Having read Atlas Shrugged, and therefore associating the quote in context, it is what I take the meaning to be. But, as I said, I’ve been wrong before.
I think we have different definitions of the term "proof".
Food for thought.
We must remember who we were, not just as defined by our U.S. Constitution, but who we were in our relationship with God and our culture. Not to demean others, but to have a grateful heart to God for what he has given us who are the descendants of Western Civilization, and to not ever be ashamed of that but to once again be proud of it.(Proud, not in a haughty type of way, but in a grateful and gracious way of remembering and keeping alive and bringing back to leadership what is very close to being lost)
(Skousen is a Mormon, I am most definitely not, but his thoughts on political philosophy do not reflect Mormonism at all. Rather, they seem to clarify a lot of ideas that were common knowledge and have fallen into confusion and disarray in our country in the last 100 years.)
For unto whomsoever much is given, of him shall be much required. Luke 12:48
There is a big difference between laying down your life for your friends (or loved ones, or perhaps your church) by choice; and living your life for the sake of (in other words, AT THE BEHEST OF) some powerful or charismatic third party.
Granting "another man" control over the direction of your life isn't any more Christian than it is Randian.
Seems so simple, doesn’t it? :{)
Interesting.
So this interview turned out to be Venner’s swan song.
How much better, even with the EU, the life and social situation of Europeans would be without the open invitation
they felt it necessary to make to Islam.
Venner has a classic, long-term synoptic view of things which is hard for me not to grasp, but to take issue with. His view is so resolutely philosophical he rendered himself a martyr
to his own beliefs. Much like, I shouldn’t have to mention, a radical Islamist.
I’ve been puzzling over his wake up call to France.
The Christian way is very clear. Paul lays it out. We do not own our bodies. We did not make them and we did not get them to play with as we see fit.
But - Venner’s thougths echo my own on this issue.
Are you saying that you think Jesus was referring to suicide, or do I grossly misunderstand you?
When a person voluntarily takes themselves out of the picture, they forfeit any control they might have had over the outcome from that point. I value the views he held on gay marriage. He got my attention while simultaneously losing my respect for not sticking around to “fight the good fight”. There has got to be more at play here than just making a stand that is likely to be a mere footnote in history. I suspect clinical depression.
Where would the human race be if all of our heros decided that the most effective defense was to check out on us.
My post wasn't very clear. The principle doesn't apply in this case. I was responding to a specific post that quoted Ayn Rand.
Europe is entering a post-Christian era. C.S. Lewis predicted that post-Christian paganism would be worse than pre-Christian paganism, since the former would represent an explicit rejection of Christ.
This may sound absurd to modern ears, since we tend to define progress technologically. But Western culture, at the highest levels, is rejecting the natural order itself. Men and women are now considered absolutely equal. Gender is a 'social construct.' And human nature is equated with animal nature, and sometimes even valued less than the earth as a whole.
This can only end in disaster.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.