Pope To Consider Allowing People To Live

[Alexander's Horse]

Originally posted by Terra Nullius

The doctrine of infallibilty is very rarely invoked. However, where it is invoked, a faithful Catholic has no option but to submit humbly to the Church's authority or stop being a Catholic.

Well, not really - most catholics politely ignore the Vatican when its pronouncements conflict with their God given common sense - even in Como.

[Flip McWho]

Aye thats another thing I love about Catholics.

You all call yourselves catholic but you all have you're own little way that you view the thing. You're not all under the yoke of the head honcho.

[Robert]

Originally posted by Terra Nullius

I'm not sure what you're saying here. It looks like you just contradicted yourself?

Sorry, you're right. Thanks, I've fixed it.

I'm not too sure but it seems like you're trying to provide a rational explanation for Christianity here. I don't think Christianity can or should be explained rationally.

Why not? Paul oftenly comes with rational reasoning himself as well. Rational reasoning just only will not lead to faith. But it may remove some obstacles of pre justice that much people hold against christianity.

Which is not to say that there is no use for the faculty of reason. But Christianity itself should be accepted or rejected on the basis of faith, not reason.

You mix up the greek meaning of faith and the english meaning of faith. If the Bible speaks about having faith in Christ, it doesn't mean you have to 'believe he exists' or something, but you have to trust all of your life to him. You have to trust that your life is safe in his hands.

that's not an emotional decision, but a rational decision. Of course based on several reasons, among them are "i'm not capable to live a rightious life myself" and "He's the King and he's worth it to be followed".

I'm only worried about the large number of silly rules that are made by the RCC.

I don't think they are generally 'silly' rules. If they were, they could be easily dismissed. Mostly, they are very carefully reasoned, logical rules.[/q]

Those made-up rules, like against anti-conception or the hierarchy in the church are really more a burden to the church then a benefit.
Not to mention the "priests should not marry" rule, which has always been a reason for much much troubles.

As I see it, the problem is two-fold.
1) The weight of rules overshadows the practice of compassionate love.
As I said before, this is also cause for division within the Church between 'left' and 'right' factions.

The biggest problem is indeed that these silly rules distract the attention from the core of the gospel, that Jesus Christ died for us, and that we can live with him forever.

2) The careful logic of 'The Rules' does not readily take into account the difficulty of actually putting them into practice.
ie. While those rules may be carefully reasoned, they tend to define an absolute standard of perfect behaviour - and none of us is perfect. (Which is a problem in itself; not being perfect is not an adequate excuse for failing to strive for perfection).

Briefly, I don't think 'silly' typifies RCC teaching. But perfect logic and perfect behaviour is sometimes emphasised over simple human compassion.

I think you are to positive to these rules.
Most of them are not carefully reasoned, but just came from the human nature to come with strange rules, for sure if it concerns sexuality. You can see all over the world that people / religions come with the weirdest rules if it concerns sexuality. Even in our modern days the liberals come with absurd ideas, like let's create magazines for teenagers in the age of 13-15 in which we explain to them how the can and should have sex with multiple people, and how cool that'll make you (and how much money we will earn by it)

I'm not sure if those magazines are available in the states, overhere in the netherlands, there are plenty.

And indeed: every church is fallable, also is my own church.

Depends on your point of view.

It's fine for you, as a non-Catholic, to see the RCC as fallible. It is not OK for a Catholic to hold the same opinion. To do so would be apostasy.

I know it's not ok for the RCC. That's quite arrogant though. The RCC is not THE church. It's just a church, eventhough it's the biggest one. THE church is not an earthly institution. THE church are all christians together, gathered from all churches worldwide.

The doctrine of infallibilty is very rarely invoked. However, where it is invoked, a faithful Catholic has no option but to submit humbly to the Church's authority or stop being a Catholic.

But once again, there's no Biblical argument for this.

[Robert]

Originally posted by Flip McWho
Aye thats another thing I love about Catholics.

You all call yourselves catholic but you all have you're own little way that you view the thing. You're not all under the yoke of the head honcho.

Firstly: I'm not a catholic, I'm a (protestant) christian.
Secondly, there's no problem in christianity with different opinions on minor issues. Paul writes in the Bible that it's no problem to have different opinions on how to serve the Lord, and that you should respect each other and love each other, despite of the differences. The main issue is that Jesus Christ is our Lord and Savior, and we can be saved by no-other means then be him.

That's something that both catholics and protestants, eventhough we may disagree on other issues, share.

Flip McWho: Yeah it is. What more could you want in a religion but a perfect divine being whose your champion? Hes the perfect hero of the story.

That's not really true. It's not a part of our nature to accept that we are fallable and not able to do good, and that we should depend and rely on someone else (= Jesus) who is not a winner because he defeated the enemy, but because he suffered and died.

Human relgions are religions with victorious founders or leaders, who, either by the word or by the sword, are heroes.

And the followers of the religion can prove their worthyness by living the perfect life and by following the rules, to, in such a way, EARN the prize.

Christianity is not like that.
In fact it's not even a religion (eventhough most christians make it a religion, and make it very alike to the other religions, but once again, that's because we are humans as well, making human mistakes)

[Terra Nullius]

Originally posted by Alexander's Horse
Well, not really - most catholics politely ignore the Vatican when its pronouncements conflict with their God given common sense - even in Como.

Careful kiddo!

That's the sort of attitude'll land you in Tempe.

[Terra Nullius]

Originally posted by CyberShy
If the Bible speaks about having faith in Christ, it doesn't mean you have to 'believe he exists' or something, but you have to trust all of your life to him.

Don't mind me, Cyber. I'm just going to borrow your quote to spank a horse.

See Horsie, this is exactly the sort of de fide matter where you don't have the freedom to make individual choices.

Jesus, the Nazarene walked the Earth as an actual, historical person. His real birth, death and bodily resurrection are not subject to questioning.

I don't see anything in Cyber's quote that's incompatible with a pantheist interpretation of scripture. To a catholic, that would be anathema.

*runs off to hide under a garlic clove

[Terra Nullius]

Originally posted by CyberShy
Paul oftenly comes with rational reasoning himself as well. Rational reasoning just only will not lead to faith. But it may remove some obstacles of pre justice that much people hold against christianity.

I think we're just talking at cross-purposes here.

My point is that, for example, it is unreasonable for God, the creator of heaven and Earth to give up his Son for a bunch of hairless monkeys. It is unreasonable to accept that Christ died on the Cross for our sakes, it is unreasonable to believe that miracles really happened.

It is, above all, unreasonable for us to love one another.

[Terra Nullius]

Originally posted by CyberShy

That's quite arrogant though. The RCC is not THE church.

Maybe so. But that's the Church's teaching.

Generally, they've been making progress on ecumenism. Most priests these days would almost certainly emphasise co-operation and seeking unity rather than division in daily practice.

Strictly speaking though, the RCC sees itself as 'Right' and everyone else as 'Wrong.' Well, everyone except the Greeks, but we're working on that.

[Robert]

Originally posted by Terra Nullius

Don't mind me, Cyber. I'm just going to borrow your quote to spank a horse.

(...)

I don't see anything in Cyber's quote that's incompatible with a pantheist interpretation of scripture. To a catholic, that would be anathema.

*runs off to hide under a garlic clove

Of course you're free to span anyone you want with my quotes. Though it may be important for you to know that apparantly do not understand my quote.

My quote is not about not believing in the existance of Jesus or God. It is about that 'believing in his existance' is not the matter that matters. ("The demons believe in his existance, and they are frightened for him")
What matters is that you want to follow him, that you want to give your life to him, that you trust all you are and all you will ever be to him. That matters. And that's much more then believing in existance or something.

I'm not sure if the quote is still usuable for horse spanking.

[Robert]

Originally posted by Terra Nullius

I think we're just talking at cross-purposes here.

My point is that, for example, it is unreasonable for God, the creator of heaven and Earth to give up his Son for a bunch of hairless monkeys. It is unreasonable to accept that Christ died on the Cross for our sakes, it is unreasonable to believe that miracles really happened.

it's unreasonable for US. not for God.
Though it is reasonable, if we are filled by the Holy Spirit.

Though what I meant to say is that it's reasonable that the christian faith is not like other religions.
For other religions are reasonable for humanity while christianity is against all that's human, and is for that reason not a faith that would be invented by humans.

[Robert]

Originally posted by Terra Nullius

Maybe so. But that's the Church's teaching.

Generally, they've been making progress on ecumenism. Most priests these days would almost certainly emphasise co-operation and seeking unity rather than division in daily practice.

Strictly speaking though, the RCC sees itself as 'Right' and everyone else as 'Wrong.' Well, everyone except the Greeks, but we're working on that.

I know, it's not really good though.
For sure that's all based on RC teaching and not on biblical revelation.

In the end that makes you not much different then the mormons. They reason that they are the true believers, because the book of Mormon says so.
The RCC says they're the true church, because the teachings of the RCC tell them so.

In the end non-christians could say that all christians are like that, since the Bible tells us so.
Oh well, that might be true, but if you're a christian, base yourself on the Bible. Then the non-christians may hold that up against us. But don't hide behind some human inventions. No matter if it's called the book of Mormon, the Qu'ran or the RC Teachings.

[Alexander's Horse]

Originally posted by Terra Nullius

Careful kiddo!

That's the sort of attitude'll land you in Tempe.

That hurt. I often went to Tempe station as a child and I still haven't got over it.

[DaShi]

Originally posted by CyberShy

I know it's not ok for the RCC. That's quite arrogant though. The RCC is not THE church. It's just a church, eventhough it's the biggest one. THE church is not an earthly institution. THE church are all christians together, gathered from all churches worldwide.

This gave you away as a protestant. The Catholic church is often referred to as the Church (with church capitolized) and has been since before most of the protestant sects broke off.

As a Catholic, I don't like the idea of protestant churches lumping Catholics with them by using Christianity. Mostly because I've met many "nondenominational" protestants who've been quite open with their opinions about the Church, and I'd rather not be associated with those types. Protestants are free to have their wacky ideas, just don't include us in them. We've got our own.

[DaShi]

Originally posted by Alexander's Horse


Well, not really - most catholics politely ignore the Vatican when its pronouncements conflict with their God given common sense - even in Como.

If only more protestants would have that opinion for their dear leader, the Bible. I mean, they worship a book for God's sake!

[Jon Miller]

Originally posted by DaShi


If only more protestants would have that opinion for their dear leader, the Bible. I mean, they worship a book for God's sake!

Protestants claim to not follow tradition. (although obviously they do.. even more so than Catholics at times) But obviously, if you don't follow tradition, the other things to follow are revelation (which is why protestants are more likely to be tricked by weird cults) and the Bible.

Jon Miller