The Neverending Story (The New Christian Chronicles)

Southern Baptists ending talks with Catholic Church ^ | 3/24/01 | AP

[malakhi]

The Neverending Story
An ongoing debate on Scripture, Tradition, History and Interpretation.

Statesmen may plan and speculate for liberty, but it is religion and morality alone which can establish the principles upon which freedom can securely stand. The only foundation of a free constitution is pure virtue. - John Adams

Thread 162
TNS Archives

[Invincibly Ignorant]

I'm not a big audio geek so don't take this as infallible. I'll look it up in the catechism and see if I can get you a better answer:)

Ok found my problem. I was trying to record from 2 channels but when your vcr isn't stereo that can be a problem. Everything is working. Thanx.

[SoothingDave]

Hmmm. I searched the Catechism for occurences of "intrinsically evil" and found two instances, only two.

# 2356 Deals with Rape. No argument here.

This is also dealing with incest/pedophilia. Thank you, I knew I encountered the phrase somewhere recently, it was when I posted this paragraph.

# 2370 Deals with birth control.

"...In contrast, "every action which, whether in anticipation of the conjugal act, or in its accomplishment, or in the development of its natural consequences, proposes, whether as an end or as a means, to render procreation impossible" is intrinsically evil:"

THE ONLY TWO SINS IN THE CATECHISM WORTHY OF THE LABEL "INTRINSICALLY EVIL!!!! HMMMM????

The first deals with the pedophilia crises quite well. It is intrinsically evil. And refuting life at its origin is also an evil.

I am sure there are more instances of language jsut as stron, or stronger. I would not get overly excited about the four letter word and where it appears. All sin is evil. I think we acknowledge that.

BTW, you can also read the "birth control" section above to call evil any act which is "renders procreation impossible." This neatly wraps us all manners of sexual sins as intrinsically evil.

SD

[SoothingDave]

Oh, I understand the language just fine. I understand the language of the scriptures. I understand english. And I understand Greek and Some Chaldee. I just don't understand the Catholic tendancy to fabricate words for everything under the sun rather than sticking with the verbage the Apostles used.

Please see 30966, 30968 and 30972. then tell me about the "language" you understand.

SD

[Isaiah_66_2]

But you weren't taught that via the catechism. Where is the "official" teaching?

Uh, hmmmm, er, ah-----the Bible!

[SoothingDave]

Any practice of homosexuality, pedophilia, or other non-chaste sexuality -- whether by priests, Protestant ministers, rabbis, imams, Buddhists, Hindus, Shinto, animists, Trekkies, or any other human beings -- is intrinsically evil and sinful.

But you aren't taught that via the catechism. Where is the "official" teaching?

Please see your 30974

SD

[eastsider]

And I understand Greek ...

Excellent. You must understand, then, that Greek nouns have two parts, a base and an ending, the former indicating the basic meaning of the word, the latter indicating its syntax. Thus, in Mt16:18, petrh gramatically references Petros because the base (petr-), and thus the basic meaning ("rock") is the same (as in tauth).

[SoothingDave]

Can you stand another? Here goes?

2346 Charity is the form of all the virtues. Under its influence, chastity appears as a school of the gift of the person. Self-mastery is ordered to the gift of self. Chastity leads him who practices it to become a witness to his neighbor of God's fidelity and loving kindness.

Chastity leads him who practices it to become a witness to his neighbor of God's fidelity and loving kindness! Wow!

Somehow this means, to you, that the Church approves of people living a homosexual lifestyle. Though the call to chastity leads one to be a witness of God's fidelity and kindness. Somehow, you think that a gay lifestyle is a good witness, according to the Catholics, anyway.

Are you ready to apologize for your gross mischaracterization?

SD

[Isaiah_66_2]

What then are we arguing about

LOL----I don't think we are arguing at all. I think we are coming into agreement, for the witnessing to the RCs and the RCC's propensity to harbor corrupt and intrinsically evil clerics, as well as preaching a false gospel.:-)

I do thank you for your forthright and honest indulgence in productive discussion.

I am relatively new to this forum, and this is the first time I think I've seen your posts.

Am I correct in that you are of the Eastern Orthodox tradition? It appears so to me.

I'll look for your reply later, time for lunch now.

Maranantha.

[RobbyS]

But of course I'm not aiming at you. But I beg to differ that funamentalists are not prone to divorce. The apostate Irishman, Bill Mara of P.I.C ,once pointed out correctly that the Bible Belt has a divorce rate as high as Hollywood's. Those who think that a married clergy is the panaxea for the ills of the Catholic priesthood should consider the drawbacks. The Greek Church has a problem with the scarcity of women who are willing to live a life of genteel poverty. The American Church would have to worry about the high cost of alimony.

[OLD REGGIE]

The trouble is, your belief about the pre-Constantinian state of the Church is simply wrong, and unsupported by historical facts. The Church was not, as the Latins hold, headed by the Pope of Rome. Indeed such claims may be traced at earliest to some writings of Latin Fathers in defense of the authority of bishops, which are misquoted by the Latins as supporting a unique charism inheritted by the Bishop of Rome. (St. Cyprian, for instance, wrote about the "chair of Peter" in defense of his own episcopate in Carthage against a rebel named Felicissimus. His later writing support this interpretation, rather than that given by the Latins as applying the "chair of Peter" only to the Popes of Rome.)

First, let me compliment you on your writing skills. I will give you an "A".

Unfortunately it isn't possible to say the same concerning your comprehension. If you have read my posts for the past months you would be aware we have been saying basically the same things concerning the "early" Church. I have made the point that the "Pre-Constantinian" Church was vastly different from the "Post-Constantinian". If you care to dispute this point, be my guest. The differences along the line which led to the Schism is a different story and one in which I have have very little, if anything, to say. (It is necessary to qualify this statement because I might have made some wise comment from time to time concerning the RCC position on the Primacy of the Bishop of Rome vs the Orthodox position. OK. I admit; I have said the Orthodox position is correct.)

You appear to be a sincere and forthright person. I believe you have a completely distorted view of my position(s) based on a few words you have read and have taken in a completely literal, out of context, way.

BTW I apologize for calling you a pompous ass yesterday. I still think you were acting in a pompous manner but I had no right to insult you in a personal way.

Peace,
Reggie

[SoothingDave]

But I beg to differ that funamentalists are not prone to divorce.

I don't think he said that. I think he said that none of us have a very good record, with Catholics getting divorced at the same rate as non Catholics.

SD

[RobbyS]

When statements are precise, there is no confusion.

Now you are blaming the apostles and evangelists? If they had spoken in plain English--had written it down and signed it--then we would have no argument, right. But they did it so badly that only you understand precisely what they meant!

[Isaiah_66_2]

looks like the ExLax worked, eh?;)

Finally! I have heard it takes a while to take effect.

Looks like Dave has finally shunned me as promised.
That makes me soooo sad---NOT!

YIPPEEEEEE!!! Thanks be to God---He does still work miracles.:-)

The name "soothing dave", reminds me of one of the early popes, who taught that sex of any kind was not sinful(he was of the gnostic flavor), and aside from being a bisexual, he had a stable of mistresses, of both sexes---but at a villa he owned outside of Rome, kept one of his mistresses and her daughter, with whom he had 3 somes with. His name was "innocent".

I'm outta here for lunch---later.

[IMRight]

Yes, sadly.

And Christians (of all flavors) at essentially the same rate as non-christians.

Perhaps we should start a new poll Mack?

How many marriages have you had?
What chance is there of a divorce ever occuring?
Why?

I suspect that we may get an interesting result from this group.

[OLD REGGIE]

I got my app for AARP card the other day, I'll be 50 in may, is it worth anything Reggie or should I throw it in the trash?

Every "deal" you get through AARP whether it is auto rental, home insurance, health insurance, etc., is guaranteed to be more expensive than you can do on your own. Other than that, it is OK.

The major benefit of AARP is that they are an effective lobbying agent on behalf of the elderly. You are far from elderly. All they can do for you is take your money.

[ksen]

...what do they do with the old wedding rings?

I don't know, you should ask the Kennedy clan.

-ksen

[Wordsmith]

I have made the point that the "Pre-Constantinian" Church was vastly different from the "Post-Constantinian".

Hi Reggie. Do you think that the Pre-Constantinian Church was the same Church as the Post-Constantinian Church, despite the "vast differences? In other words, I'm vastly different from who I was as a child, but am the same person. I know this is beyond the scope of the conversation you've been having, and I promise not to bring up Latin :), but the way you worded this made me think of the question. God Bless.

[B-Chan]

Sorry. I'm Catholic myself. Forgive me if I gave any other impression.

[Havoc]

Now you are blaming the apostles and evangelists?

Only you and your twisted backwards sense of things could turn what I said into a charge against the apostles.

[Havoc]

And men don't fly.

So, I guess the terrorists carried those big Jumbo Jets into downtown New York and hurled them at the twin towers? My dad had to be licensed to fly for more than 30 years. Men do fly. Men were not designed by God to be able to fly; but, men through their own means fly. It is un-natural, but I would not consider it evil. Try again.