| This thread has been locked, it will not receive new replies. |
|
Locked on 07/13/2010 2:29:14 PM PDT by Religion Moderator, reason:
Poster’s request |
Posted on 07/06/2010 6:54:33 AM PDT by Brian Kopp DPM
I posted that to you, because you were complaining about the RF Mod. I wanted the Mod to have some supportive input from another poster. Truthfully, another mod here would not be as fair, honest, or even-handed.
From reading your posts over the past 24, you appear to have difficulty getting along with other posters and the Mod. I have no NEED to post anything to you; that’s mind-reading. I did it for my own reasons.
I pinged the Mod as a courtesy because he was mentioned. If you have a complaint about that, then hit the abuse button, don’t come whining to me.
I think it WAS far too frequent a few decades back. One of the Friars I enjoy hanging around with has a series of jokes about "Sister Mary Sadistica," He was born in 1942.
I once browsed through a pretty funny book called "Why Catholics Can't Sing." It's not a question that keeps me up at night, so I didn't give the book the attention it might have deserved.
But the authors point was that Irish Catholics, who were a strong influence on US Catholicism generally, were essentially "Jansenists." Jansenism was a quasi-Calvinist heresy that arose after the Reformation, and one of its characteristics was an excessive gloominess and rejection of the goodness of God's creation.
The author's conjecture seemed to be the Ireland was fertile ground for this theological gloominess because of the long persecutions and other bad aspects of British and Protestant rule. (Not saying protestant rule is intrinsically bad, but anti-Catholic rule is kind of hard on the Catholics.)
Anyway that environment lays in one strand to the cable. And the other strand is the foolishness of many bishops who, influenced by this anti-life Jansenism, wanted to produce a stable of clergy and 'religious' who were "unspotted from the world."
Consequently they admitted a lot of very emotionally immature people into seminaries, convents, and monasteries. And one can imagine that there was a kind of self-selection of people who were really conflicted about their sexuality, autonomy, blah blah.
Hence, Sister Mary Sadistica, and her tribe: a group of people who had a gloomy, pseudo-Calvinist distrust of human nature, and a consequent inability to give children what they needed. They were sent out to preach and had never heard the Gospel themselves.
Anyway, that's my account of it. I know I became Catholic because, as I thought of it, I saw beyond this thorny hedge of almost heretics to what Catholicism really is. From my POV those sisters, brothers, and clergy have a LOT of 'splainin' to do.
But no, this is not now the normal experience of the young Catholic,
At the Catholic hospital where I worked, we had Sister Obstinata, Sister Confusionata, and Sister Medicatum. ;-D
Yeah, yeah, I know, everything's about you. Why don't you reread the title of the thread?
The Truth of IT all is - THE WORD WON - and Mad Dawg complained.
You are Jesus now? I'm surprised that Mad Dawg didn't recognize you. However I will admit that your disguise is excellent.
That's it in a nutshell. And EVERYONE knows it!!
They sure do. The nuts are cracking.
And The Truth will ALWAYS win - in spite of what we all see in the natural.
Yes. That is why the Protestant pantheon is crumbling before our eyes and the trickle, soon to become a flood, is crossing the Tiber, or heading East. God is calling them back home to the Church.
My husband was raised Roman Catholic and he said when he was about ten years old, he went to a different church than the one he usually went to. A nun approached him and said in a mean voice, “What are YOU doing here? You don’t belong here!”. He never went back to a Catholic Church and his Mom didn’t make him. He is a Christian and loves the Lord Jesus Christ but this experience turned him off to the Catholic Church forever. I wonder why so many in authority don’t realize the lasting, negative effect they have on kids.
I taught elementary school in the late seventies and I still pray sometimes for my students that the Lord would heal them from anything I might have done or said that turned them away from him.
A flood? You need to scripture up, buttercup. The last days speak of apostacy, not revival.
"This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come. For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy..having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away". (2 Tim. 3:1,2,5).
"for the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine! But after their own lust shall they heap to themselves teachers having itching ears; and they shall turn away their ears from the truth and shall be turned unto fables." (2 Tim. 4:3,4).
Feeling proud? Feeling boastful?
When one looks at many of the posts, one realizes that intemperance and indiscretion are considered good things by some. The idea of a "Virtue-based" ethic is not rejected, only because it isn't considered long enough to qualify for rejection.
As Scripture suggests, a rejection of Virtue leads to a loss of virtues. And clearly not only are temperance and prudence early victims, but justice also is forsaken. Maybe there's some fortitude still being exercised, but I'm not sure.
And that's before we get to the infused virtues, the ones that come only by extraordinary gift. There's no charity in gang-banging Mormons. It's hard to imagine that a Mormon would be converted by a bunch of "orthodox" Christians circling him and howling like coyotes.
I do not mean this to be a general slam, a sort of dignified howl. But some things struck me: The first was the contempt for temperance. This is cloaked by an adopted attitude which might be articulated as "Extremism in the defense of MY view of the Gospel is no vice."
And who knows? Maybe it isn't. But one problem with it is that conversation is not possible when people are yelling at each other. When reason and justice are forsaken, all that's left is force majeure. Rhetorical might, or at least persistence, makes right.
No room is made for Truth to enter in, because they see no need to make room. Instead of being possessed BY the Truth, they think of themselves as possessing the truth, and they thank God that they are not as others are, or even as these Catholics.
The predictable consequence of the renunciation of prudence, temperance, and justice is a degradation of fortitude and of judgment or discernment.
Here I have to say, on both sides there was a little high-fiving among the members of one gang, a little eagerness to take potshots at one's opponent in threads not addressed to him -- all, of course, in the name of the God of Love.
But a simple aspect of the loss of judgment is the manifest inability to distinguish between going after an argument and going after the person who made it. So when somebody makes an assertion which can be disproved with less than five minutes research, to point that out and to ask for an account of the error is considered going after the person, rather than going after the argument.
And the vice of injustice leads to its own punishment, a sense of outrage when confronted with the consequences of one's injustice.
So what we face when the battle flag goes up is an opposition each one of whom thinks that his or her own 'discernment' is the final arbiter, and that anyone who persists in another view is vicious.
But all of the above is comparatively trivial, maybe matter more fit for a psychological than a theological or epistemological consideration.
What is important is that here are both of the oldest sophistries, two of the Father of Lies favorite lies come together. "Might makes right," and persistence (or timely withdrawal) matters more than the rightness of the cause; and "Man is the measure" - "my discernment" trumps any objective standard.
Digression: Where this melds with the "psychopathology of everyday life" is at the juncture where "MY FEELINGS BEING HURT" becomes confused with an act of discernment. In truth, hurt feelings are nothing more than a "heads up": Something important is happening, but I need to exercise THOUGHT to know what's going on. But what it more frankly pathological (and there are folks on either side with this "issue") is the sense that "MY feelings" are dispositive, while YOURS are irrelevant (or deserved.)
And what this shows is how some forms of Protestantism, and especially of Sola Scriptura, has led to modern relativism. If it's all nothing more or less than "my inner conviction", if "my inner conviction" trumps any objective standard, then nothing distinguishes me from the thug acting out the teaching of a Nietzsche he has never read.
Finally, it is not our arguments that are wrong, in their eyes. Indeed our arguments n=do not merit consideration. It is our arguing at all that is wrong! In arguing we are searching for a standard of judgment with which both sides are in agreement. Having found it, we lay out are views in respect to that standard.
But while our opponents CLAIM Scripture as their standard, what their many fissiparations make clear is that it is "MY OWN interpretation (and that of my homies)" that is the standard. They have sown the wind of personal interpretation and they reap the whirlwind of a loss of objective reason. In the words cited by Eusebius, they begin in voluntary ignorance and end up in involuntary psychosis.
So, DBK, your noble effort in this thread has produced fruit. Maybe it's not the fruit you were looking for, but it's not bad fruit.
Its not about anyone or anything else but the LORD Jesus Christ
Above All
Verse 1
Above all powers Above all kings
Above all nature And all created things
Above all wisdom And all the ways of man
You were here Before the world began
Verse 2
Above all kingdoms Above all thrones
Above all wonders The world has ever known
Above all wealth And treasures of the earth
There’s no way to measure What You’re worth
CHORUS
Crucified Laid behind a stone
You lived to die Rejected and alone
Like a rose Trampled on the ground
You took the fall And thought of me
Above all
Verse 1
Above all powers Above all kings
Above all nature And all created things
Above all wisdom And all the ways of man
You were here Before the world began
Verse 2
Above all kingdoms Above all thrones
Above all wonders The world has ever known
Above all wealth And treasures of the earth
There’s no way to measure What You’re worth
CHORUS
Crucified Laid behind a stone
You lived to die Rejected and alone
Like a rose Trampled on the ground
You took the fall And thought of me
Above all
CHORUS
Crucified Laid behind a stone
You lived to die Rejected and alone
Like a rose Trampled on the ground
You took the fall And thought of me
Above all
Like a rose Trampled on the ground
You took the fall And thought of me
Above all
(Songwriters: Baloche, Paul; Leblanc, Lenny)
Performed by Michael W Smith
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I7Sn5rV6oM0
Thanks. I know that but that doesn’t have anything to do with THE PRINCIPLE of two wrongs ...being followed through.
How do you based a principle on ‘should hoods’ for one that is wrong. It appears very PC - and anti-conservative as one can get, IMO.
I make it to the comparison of - an illegal should know not to cross the border into AZ.
You think that these are the last days? When Elijah reappears, I'll pay serious attention (Matthew 17 and Sirach 44). When the Jews convert en masse, I'll pay serious attention (Romans 11), and events which change the earth's physical appearance, I'll pay very serious attention. What do you figure is the sign of the Son of Man that will appear in the heavens?
I think that we have some time yet left to go. This period ain't nuthin' compared to what I read the end times is going to be like.
"This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come. For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy..having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away". (2 Tim. 3:1,2,5).
Sounds like the end times started in the mid 1500s.
"for the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine! But after their own lust shall they heap to themselves teachers having itching ears; and they shall turn away their ears from the truth and shall be turned unto fables." (2 Tim. 4:3,4).
You can say that any time in the last 2000 years fits that bill, but I would point to the last 500 years. A tad longer than a generation, I'd say.
Feeling proud? Feeling boastful?
Not particularly. If I can reclaim one lost sheep for God, then I might give in to a small "YEAHHHHH". Have I done so this evening?
Of course it is! But some don’t WANT that but HE knows all.
A welcome breath of fresh air.
Thank you - perhaps you can pass it to someone else. I don’t drink wine - just the water used before the wine.;)
I would like a clear concise understanding of what you are saying here. How has Sola Scriptura led to modern relativism. It seems to be that a religion that adds and takes from it's teachings is more prone to modern relativism. After all nothing is permanent, for long. It can always be altered to fit situations. Because from the beginning, it has been fluid. Depending on who is in charge, who stays, who leaves, what in the world may change that necessarily makes changes everywhere, including doctrine and tradition. Just like some think of the US Constitution as fluid, ever changing, RC doctrine and tradition is fluid, ever changing, as changes warrant.
I think I started school at the end of the era of the rulng-wielding nuns :-) I never once heard of anyone in 12 years striking a child. The public school kids would tell horror stories of the paddle with the holes in it but not in my school. And I am also very grateful for my education.
Now there were six stone water jars there for the Jewish rites of purification, each holding twenty or thirty gallons. Jesus said to the servants, “Fill the jars with water.” And they filled them up to the brim. And he said to them, “Now draw some out and take it to the master of the feast.” So they took it. When the master of the feast tasted the water now become wine, and did not know where it came from (though the servants who had drawn the water knew), the master of the feast called the bridegroom and said to him, “Everyone serves the good wine first, and when people have drunk freely, then the poor wine. But you have kept the good wine until now.” This, the first of his signs, Jesus did at Cana in Galilee, and manifested his glory. And his disciples believed in him.
—John 2:1-11
And let us not forget that Jesus was considered a drunkard by the Jews. Well, if not wine, how about a good extra stout or porter?
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.