|
Your ideology is similar to that of the Easterners who claim that the (objectively flawed) Julian calendar is the superior choice. And they also claim that the Nicene creed should stay in its earlier flawed format rather than the improved and objectively correct format. They have no understanding of time and place, which is what differentiates them from the Catholic Church. The Catholic Church adapts.
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2015 12:12
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 10:22 |
|
|
Kyrie eleison posted:Your ideology is similar to that of the Easterners who claim that the (objectively flawed) Julian calendar is the superior choice. And they also claim that the Nicene creed should stay in its earlier flawed format rather than the improved and objectively correct format. They have no understanding of time and place, which is what differentiates them from the Catholic Church. The Catholic Church adapts. What are your thoughts on sedevacantism? I have my own, but I would like to hear yours.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2015 12:15
|
|
|
Kyrie eleison posted:It's not. Things are suitable to their time and place. It's absurd to say otherwise. I would entirely agree that the validity of an idea is determined by the circumstances into which it is placed, but then, I would, being atheist and not subscribing to the concept of absolutism, and all that. This of course means that I disagree with a lot of stuff, because many ideas aren't defensible given the march of understanding. In your case however, it must be rather difficult to hold that view and simultaneously believe everything the Church says, being Catholic and all. But then, perhaps I'm a Christian, because I don't disagree with it, I just think it's suited to a time and place long since past. See you in Heaven, I guess.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2015 12:15
|
|
|
You're like those dumb Greeks who want to go back to the 12th century. Stop clinging to that old, dusty Vatican II like a Greek and join me in the 12th century.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2015 13:01
|
|
|
Kyrie eleison posted:I think V2 happened and JP2 met with all the religious leaders because we were at imminent threat of species nuclear destruction and otherwise we wouldn't have done something so drastic. But we're at relatively low risk of that now so it's time to put that aside and get back to basics. Presumably "basics" includes nattering on at your congregation in a language they do not understand.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2015 14:47
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:Presumably "basics" includes nattering on at your congregation in a language they do not understand. And changing the phrasing at mass so that when I go back after not being in a church in twelve years I'm all the gently caress off my game.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2015 15:23
|
|
|
Literally The Worst posted:And changing the phrasing at mass so that when I go back after not being in a church in twelve years I'm all the gently caress off my game. Just when you think you know the Nicean Creed by heart, they go and change it on you because of some dumb need to appease the Greeks.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2015 15:25
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:Presumably "basics" includes nattering on at your congregation in a language they do not understand. Having people actually understand anything about the religion is a major negative in the eyes of the Catholic Church.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2015 15:33
|
|
|
Who What Now posted:Having people actually understand anything about the religion is a major negative in the eyes of the Catholic Church. Hahaha what? Long ago maybe. The catechism, church documents, the bible, and liturgies are translated into nearly every language nowadays, and it isn't exactly hard to get ahold of any of them.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2015 15:38
|
|
Sinnlos posted:Hahaha what? Long ago maybe. The catechism, church documents, the bible, and liturgies are translated into nearly every language nowadays, and it isn't exactly hard to get ahold of any of them. I mean, not that long in the grand historical scheme, but it's not like anyone's great great great grandparents could remember.
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2015 15:40
|
|
|
Sinnlos posted:Hahaha what? Long ago maybe. The catechism, church documents, the bible, and liturgies are translated into nearly every language nowadays, and it isn't exactly hard to get ahold of any of them. Disinterested posted:I mean, not that long in the grand historical scheme, but it's not like anyone's great great great grandparents could remember. My inlaws remember their parents talking about how they missed the masses being in Latin because it was "more beautiful" in their opinion. So it was still happening in some places (rural Michigan, anyway) at least a generation ago.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2015 16:01
|
|
|
Who What Now posted:My inlaws remember their parents talking about how they missed the masses being in Latin because it was "more beautiful" in their opinion. So it was still happening in some places (rural Michigan, anyway) at least a generation ago. I attended Tridentine mass in rural southwest Michigan growing up. Even pre-Vatican II you could find translations in the holder in your pew.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2015 16:05
|
|
|
Sinnlos posted:Just when you think you know the Nicean Creed by heart, they go and change it on you because of some dumb need to appease the Greeks. The whole thing. The whole drat thing. I used to be able to do mass on autopilot and then I went to my grandmother's funeral and I didn't know poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2015 16:06
|
|
Who What Now posted:My inlaws remember their parents talking about how they missed the masses being in Latin because it was "more beautiful" in their opinion. So it was still happening in some places (rural Michigan, anyway) at least a generation ago. My statement was on the wider point about the Church trying its hardest to be inaccessible. The first Church authorised bible in English was finished before 1600. Converting to native language mass as standard obviously came much later, but it's hardly the only way that believers interface with the Church. Also Mass is long rather than long so a normal person can easily memorise the meaning to the whole thing.
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2015 16:07
|
|
|
Kyrie eleison posted:I think V2 happened and JP2 met with all the religious leaders because we were at imminent threat of species nuclear destruction and otherwise we wouldn't have done something so drastic. But we're at relatively low risk of that now so it's time to put that aside and get back to basics. So tell me what role you feel the Inquisition should play in the modern day.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2015 18:36
|
|
|
Nessus posted:So tell me what role you feel the Inquisition should play in the modern day. I hear throwing gays off buildings and burning people in cages is popular in the Middle East 
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2015 18:53
|
|
|
Iran: hangs homosexuals, has a theocracy, women have little freedom, frequent executions. Do you think Kyrie would like it? Oops, think again.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2015 23:49
|
|
|
Twelve by Pies posted:Iran: hangs homosexuals, has a theocracy, women have little freedom, frequent executions. Their only fault is not having the correct theocracy. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2015 23:50
|
|
|
Sinnlos posted:What are your thoughts on sedevacantism? I have my own, but I would like to hear yours. I am sympathetic to the pain people feel over Vatican II and feel it myself. But I think sedevacantism is an extreme and sort of petulant solution. I enjoy studying the views and knowledge of some sedevacantists (Most Holy Family Monastery primarily), mainly to contrast the present day church with the older version, but they are prone to believing in sometimes ridiculous conspiracy theory. The church making mistakes has happened a million times throughout history, and the errors of V2 are just an example of that, and they should be corrected. I think this period of "watering down" the church is going to come to an end, not only because it is disgustingly cowardly but because it is not working, and enclavism is going to be a more successful survival strategy. The simple truth is that young people today do not want to join the church or stay in the church, and it is going to shrink in size. Doing ridiculous things like changing the policy on homosexuality for instance would have no effect on this, it would only delegitimize the church and diminish the spirit of its core believers. In the end the church is going to try to win back the sedevacantists.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 09:25
|
|
|
I don't know why you think the Church isn't already keen on that agenda. When it steals away protestants from the Church of England, it principally steals away ultra-conservative anglo-Catholics who were functionally pretty much Roman Catholics already. The Church already started this process of reconciliation by re-integrating the Society of St Pious X, the lunatic fringe group formerly headed by Marcel Levebvre. We're speaking here about a person who believed freemasonry was ruining the church with poisonous protestant ideas from the inside. Church unity is always, and has always been the Church's primary value. We are speaking here about a man who took great umbrage with the fact that the Church began to insist that Catholic countries should not only officially recognise the Catholic faith. He at various times expressed fairly sedevacantist views. He also made one of the great malapropisms: quote:we are of the Catholic religion. We are not of this “universal religion” as they call it today  The other great of course is that if the sedevacantists had the fire and brimstone church of yesteryear they really want it would have strung them up long ago.
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 10:19
|
|
|
By appearing strong, the Church can gain converts. Popular culture is looking VERY unattractive to a lot of people right now, and the church is missing out of an opportunity to absorb those who feel disenfranchised by the excesses of modernity. When it looks like it is selling out or being weak, people say, "why bother, the church is compromised." The critics don't seek to reform the church, but to destroy it, and they should be treated accordingly. Once the numbers start really dwindling and everyone realizes what a disaster this strategy was, then the church will have a chance to rebuild on a strong traditionalist foundation.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 10:50
|
|
Osama Bin Laden, maybe posted:By appearing strong, the Foundation an gain converts. Popular culture is looking VERY unattractive to a lot of people right now, and the Foundation is missing out of an opportunity to absorb those who feel disenfranchised by the excesses of modernity. When it looks like it is selling out or being weak, people say, "why bother, the true religion is compromised." The critics don't seek to reform the true religion, but to destroy it, and they should be treated accordingly.
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 11:02
|
|
|
Ah yes, the earth's Silent Majority of traditionalist Catholics, just waiting for a pope with the stones to rape children, burn gays, and expel the Jews again to abandon their club music and spring break parties and come back to the fold.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 11:08
|
|
|
quote:Popular culture is looking VERY unattractive to a lot of people right now and the church is missing out of an opportunity to absorb those who feel disenfranchised by the excesses of modernity. There's a slight difference between "I think pop music and rap suck and most TV shows and movies are boring" and "I think sex should only be done between one man and one woman in a marriage in the missionary position purely for the purposes of procreation."
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 12:54
|
|
|
A lot of people wish society would extol more positive values (rather than negative 'you're free to do whatever you want' values) but that doesn't mean they want someone to put the genie back in the bottle re: the sexual revolution or that they want God in any way to be involved.
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 13:07
|
|
|
Kyrie eleison posted:By appearing strong, the Church can gain converts. Popular culture is looking VERY unattractive to a lot of people right now, and the church is missing out of an opportunity to absorb those who feel disenfranchised by the excesses of modernity. I think that's mostly old farts who will all die soon, so I'm not sure that's a very winning strategy.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 14:22
|
|
|
What's Satan's position on excess
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 14:23
|
|
|
Does anyone know if the God of the bible is the all-knowing creator of all things, past, present, and future? I mean, is there no single moment God does not know and did not create, from the dawn of time to its end?
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 16:23
|
|
Broccoli Cat posted:Does anyone know if the God of the bible is the all-knowing creator of all things, past, present, and future? Yeah that's pretty much the deal.
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 16:26
|
|
|
Broccoli Cat posted:Does anyone know if the God of the bible is the all-knowing creator of all things, past, present, and future? And somehow we can act and choose freely in an absolutely determined world.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 16:30
|
|
TwoQuestions posted:an absolutely determined world. This is the case with or without God, get used to it.
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 16:32
|
|
|
Disinterested posted:Yeah that's pretty much the deal. well, that disproves free will, as each moment (and all activity therein) has been predetermined by a God who knows what each moment will be. and since the entirety of biblical religion is based on free will, either God or the bible disprove each other. now, let's get back to watching porn, eh? you're welcome.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 16:34
|
|
|
Disinterested posted:This is the case with or without God, get used to it. Though the rest of us aren't contractually obligated to claim otherwise, we can just say "yeah but let's pretend like it's not for fun"
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 16:39
|
|
|
Broccoli Cat posted:well, that disproves free will, as each moment (and all activity therein) has been predetermined by a God who knows what each moment will be. Maybe the many-worlds theory is correct and all this really disproves is that we exist as individuals
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 16:39
|
|
|
If you show a child a weak horse and a strong horse, by nature he will prefer the strong horse.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 16:42
|
|
OwlFancier posted:Though the rest of us aren't contractually obligated to claim otherwise, we can just say "yeah but let's pretend like it's not for fun" Christians are generally obliged to attempt a free-will/predestination synthesis of the kind attempted in Augustine.
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 16:42
|
|
|
Bel Shazar posted:Maybe the many-worlds theory is correct and all this really disproves is that we exist as individuals I exist as an individual. The many worlds theory is part of you, the everything not me.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 16:54
|
|
|
You don't even need many-worlds to establish compatibility between omniscience and free will- God predestined our actions by establishing a finite set of things that we can possibly do, all of which are known, but we still have free-will because the paths we take within that space are not necessarily known in advance, and are not ordained by divine will.
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 17:30
|
|
|
Effectronica posted:You don't even need many-worlds to establish compatibility between omniscience and free will- God predestined our actions by establishing a finite set of things that we can possibly do, all of which are known, but we still have free-will because the paths we take within that space are not necessarily known in advance, and are not ordained by divine will. So you are claiming that god is not omniscient?
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 17:33
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 10:22 |
|
Bel Shazar posted:So you are claiming that god is not omniscient? Not omniscient in the sense of absolute perfect knowledge, yes. Only omniscient in the sense of knowing the possible actions we can take and the probabilities we have of taking them.
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 17:35
|
|