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

[Proud2BAmerican]

How many popes would you say father bastard kids? Of course, unchaste doesn't apply to that one, to fathered bastard kids implies dirrectly that the popes who fathered bastard kids were not chaste, so you may disregard the question of "chastity" in that case.

Any bad apples in Jesus' hand picked crop of apostles?

[Proud2BAmerican]

Such as, the papist say they "worship" Mary but don't "adore" Mary.

Wrong. I refrain from calling you a liar, because I believe you are honestly mistaken.

[Proud2BAmerican]

Did I say the entire papist church is evil? Nope, sure didn't. Did I say there is a pattern of evil conduct by the heirarchy of the papist church throughout a large part of history since the 6th century---yep, sure did! Does that make the entire church, evil---of course not, [...]

Ok, I confess to having misunderstood the larger point you were driving at, namely, I infered from your posts that you thought the Catholic Church, as a whole, to be a corrupted institution. But your charge of "pattern of evil" about the members is, admittedly, not far off the mark. However, it's true of the entirety of Christianity, all denominations included: people have been sinning since Adam and Eve (the beginning of the "pattern of evil"). Heck, even Judas, an apostle of Christ, sinned something fierce.

[Proud2BAmerican]

Men flying is contrary to natural law;

I believe Dave was referring to Natural Law, as it pertains to theology/philosophy (not physics):

Rules of conduct supposedly inherent in the relations between human beings and discoverable by reason; law based upon man's innate moral sense.

[Proud2BAmerican]

When statements are precise, there is no confusion.

Do you honestly think there is any confusion about the Catholic Church's official position regarding homosexuality -- whether it's a sin or not?

[Proud2BAmerican]

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.

Men (at least some of them) have the natural gift of their brains, which leads to the capability of constructing machines able to carry men through the air, over the ground, and across the ocean (and into outer space). The lion has teeth; the bear has enormous strength; man has a brain.

[Proud2BAmerican]

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.

Men (at least some of them) have the natural gift of their brains, which leads to the capability of constructing machines able to carry men through the air, over the ground, and across the ocean (and into outer space). The lion has teeth; the bear has enormous strength; man has a brain.

But it still stands that man does not fly; the machines do. Man is simply along for the ride. (Unless you count Superman.)

[Proud2BAmerican]

It could be "fooding" or "fording."

Or "friggin" ;-) Or "farging" (from Johnny Dangerously, as in "a farging icehole" :-)

[B-Chan]

Is it necessary for me to remind you documents such as Persona Humana and Statement of Most Reverend Joseph A. Fiorenza are not the Catechism. In no way do they satisfy your "proof".

I'm afraid they do. Your contention was that the term "intrinsically disordered" did not represent the same idea as the term "intrinsically evil". I posted evidence from Church documents showing that these terms are in fact used interchangably in the context of discussion of the moral aspects of human sexuality. You have so far failed to post any evidence to counter mine; indeed, you have failed to support any of your positions evidentially, leaving the field to me. Therefore, I graciously accept your surrender.

Do words have any meaning to you? I repeat; there are only two instances where anything is called "intrinsically evil" in the Catechism...

The specific words "intrinsically evil" need not be used. Phrases like "intrinsically disordered", etc. are just other ways of expressing the same idea as the words "intrinsically evil", as you well know.

Why don't you just drop the subject? You know not wherof you speak.

My dear brother in Christ: dropping the subject is the last thing I intend to do. Allowing you to continue to spread your brand of well-intentioned but factually inaccurate and evidentially-unsupported anti-Catholic propaganda would be a disservice to the Church and a dereliction of my duty to defend the Faith. Instead, I will say a prayer during my Rosary this week especially for you, asking St. Joseph, Patron of the Universal Church, to intercede before the throne of his foster Son our Lord for your health, happiness, and better understanding of the one holy Catholic and apostolic Church.

God bless you.

B-chan

[B-Chan]

But it still stands that man does not fly; the machines do. Man is simply along for the ride. (Unless you count Superman.)

While your point is well-taken, I'd like to point out here that there are many well-attested and historically-verifiable instances of humans "flying" without benefit of airplanes, balloons, or other devices. I speak, of course, of God's saints, many of whom were able to fly (the technical term is "levitate") through the miraculous power of God. St. Joseph of Cupertino, patron of airmen and astronauts, was seen flying through the air by dozens of people on many difference occasions. With God all things are possible.

[RobbyS]

Pilots have big egos, but the wings they wear are symbolic.

[RobbyS]

The whole of the Gospel is contained is our affirmation that Jesus is the Christ. My whole objection to your approach is that you try to reduce the Gospel to what the individual may discern from reading the Book. That, to me is to make the Book into an icon that contains the Spirit. But in that Book I can see nothing so clear that the Gospel is the enterprise of a community that spreads the Word through dirct human contact, by preaching rather than reading. Some teachers, like Apollos, were so gifted in the Law that they could expound on text and convice or at least confound Jews. Others like Phillip had equal success because he could interpret Isaiah and show Christ in it to a receptive hearer. But the most fertile soil was, evidently, men who could not read a word but were convinced by the witness of other believers.

[Elsie]

Surely you jest. The univerally understood message of the Abraham and Isaac tale you cite is that God does NOT desire human sacrifice.

Then why did God TELL Abraham to DO IT?

[Proud2BAmerican]

I'd like to point out here that there are many well-attested and historically-verifiable instances of humans "flying" without benefit of airplanes, balloons, or other devices.

Perhaps a better way of phrasing it would be that man, unaided by any other force (be it a machine or some other entity outside of himself), does not and cannot fly. E.g.: God's power; a machine; a canon; a father that tosses his child in the air. :-)

[B-Chan]

That's what I meant to say. Thanks.

[RobbyS]

Did you expect a roll call? A council is, after all, a legislative body. I gather, however, there was no actual division of the House.

[The_Reader_David]

You must take into account the process by which the Church, lead by the Holy Spirit sorts out the various councils. The noted Russian lay theologian Khomiakov wrote about "reception" by the Church. The Councils which were not in accord with the faith once delivered to the saints eventually came to be ignored or anathematized by later councils. This process very much involves the entire Church, not just the hierarchy. For instance, the opposition to both the iconoclasts and the False Union Councils (Lyons and Florence/Ferrar)--also examples of councils where the Emperor had a predetermined outcome beyond preserving the peace of the Church by having the hierarchs clearly state the Faith in the face of an heretical challenge--came mostly from the laity and the monastics. It is not that the Emperor ever ceased to have a role--the role of sitting outside both factions in ecclesiastical controversies and calling for a decision--until there cease to be Emperors. Rather the Church has always had a mechanism given by the indwelling of the Holy Spirit for correcting conciliar decisions which are not in accord with the faith.

This mechanism was completely lost in the Roman Patriachate where the Popes assumed the ecclesiatical roles of the Emperor and of a Patriarch, and to some extent of an entire Ecumenical Council. This accretion of power may be linked to the name Constantine, but only by way of forged documents, the so called Donation of Constantine which purported that St. Constantine bequeathed imperial temporal power to the Popes of Rome. This, of course, never actually happened: St. Constantine set his own son on the throne of the Empire.

[vmatt]

Actually this was another interesting Jesus parallel. The Lord made Moses as a "God" with Aaron as him mouthpiece. In like kind, God was silent while Jesus was his mouthpiece.

Absolutely, Moses was a "type" of Christ all through the OT. You may remember when Moses was given the first set of tablets of the law he broke them and had to receive a new set, a type of Christ "breaking" the power of the old law and establishing a new one. There are many such types and truly so many that I can't imagine how anyone familiar with the law of Moses could reject them as coincidence.

[DouglasKC]

Absolutely, Moses was a "type" of Christ all through the OT. You may remember when Moses was given the first set of tablets of the law he broke them and had to receive a new set, a type of Christ "breaking" the power of the old law and establishing a new one. There are many such types and truly so many that I can't imagine how anyone familiar with the law of Moses could reject them as coincidence.

Angelo can't fully accept them and keep his faith so he'll never recognize them even though they're plain to me and you. I was especially struck by Abraham and Issac. Issac carried wood, Jesus carried wood. Issac was the son of promise, Jesus was the son of promise. Issac trusted his father and went docilely. Christ trusted his father and went docilely. Abraham knew God would resurrect Issac because God's promises weren't fulfilled. Jesus knew he would be resurrected beause God's promises weren't fullfilled. I'm sure there are others I haven't even comprehended yet...

[vmatt]

Jesus knew he would be resurrected beause God's promises weren't fullfilled. I'm sure there are others I haven't even comprehended yet...

Yes, let me add one of my personal favorites, when Moses came down from the mount with the law of God, the whole Israelite nation had gone astray and sinned by making the golden calf. (Christ coming down from the heavens with the new covenant from God finding the world in sin.)The golden calf was made from all the Jews who gave their golden earings for the work, even the children.(All men are under sin and guilty in the sight of God until repentance.) Moses has the calf ground to powder and sprinkled into the stream that comes out of the same mount of God. (Jesus brought the Holy Spirit which was the stream of water coming from the mount of God and brought "living water" to wash away sin. I could go on and on but it is no use. There is an old saying, "convince a man against his will and he will be of the same opinion still." When I saw the word "rosary" while reading I was about to take my que to find better things to do with my time. God bless and take care.