The Vatican today published extracts of unscripted remarks Pope Benedict XVI made on Monday in which he warned against a culture which “uses morality as a mask to confuse and destroy” and disguises falsehood “as truth and information.”
As is often the case, Benedict XVI’s most pithy and lucid comments are made when he speaks off-the-cuff, when he can once again return to the role of a professor, and this was no exception.
Speaking in the basilica of St. John Lateran, where he inaugurated a Rome diocesan congress dedicated to the sacrament of baptism, the Holy Father first of all addressed the second of three baptismal renunciations: “Do you renounce the lure of evil?”
The Pope stressed that this renunciation in the early Church referred to the rejection of “a certain kind of culture”, one that involved brutal killing as a form of entertainment. Baptism, therefore, fundamentally means “freeing oneself from that culture,” he said.
But he also stressed that today “we see cultures in which the truth does not count, in which all that counts is the spirit of calumny and destruction; a culture which does not seek goodness; a culture which uses its morality as a mask to confuse and destroy.
“To this culture, in which falsehood is disguised as truth and information, to this culture which seeks only material wealth and denies God, we say 'no'", he said.
Referring to the first renunciation – “Do you renounce sin to live in the freedom of the children of God?” – the Pope said that today being Christian is viewed as “a kind of slavery and freedom is seen as emancipation from Christian faith, in the final analysis emancipation from God.”
“Yet God made Himself vulnerable ... because He loves us,” the Pope said, adding that “our first concern” must not be “to destroy His love” because to do so is to “go against our own selves and our own freedom".
The Pope also addressed common charges made against the Church and infant baptism: that it is a form of imposing a religion on them, and that it would it be better for them to follow a catechumenal journey before baptism.
But the Holy Father said “the true question” is actually: “is it right to give life in this world without having received consent?”. He continued: “I would say that it is possible and right to do so only if, along with life, we also give the guarantee that life, despite all the problems of the world, is good [and] protected by God.”
“Only the anticipation of the meaning can justify the anticipation of life,” the Pope said. “Therefore baptism as a guarantee of God's goodness, as an anticipation of meaning, as an anticipation of God's 'yes' which protects this life, justifies the anticipation of life.”
Comments
Post a Comment
To Our Holy Father Benedict XVI: ¡Amén, Santo Padre!
Let’s face it… Pope Benedict XVI is awesome!
A culture in which more and more “the end is said to justify the means”. I.E. the root of contraception, and it’s twin fruit - abortion.
In this regard, I ought to be certain that the pope condemns all falsehoods, beginning with those in the Bible: “whenever children get out of line we should beat them with a rod”, “if they are shameless enough to talk back to us, we should kill them”, “we must also stone people to death for heresy, adultery, homosexuality, working on the sabbath, practicing sorcery” etc. Then there exists the culture of immorality pervading the ‘crusades’, the ‘inquisition’, and accepting a fixed and unchanging scientific world of Aristotle obviating all findings of modern science. Also note not one Nazi was ever excommunicated. The Bible also tells us how to sell a daughter into slavery, “When a man sells his daughter as a slave….” or even St.Paul endorses slavery; “Slaves be obedient to those who are your earthly masters…”
Mr. Jesuitical graduate:
As a Jesuitical graduate you should know that the purported Biblical citations you posted:
“whenever children get out of line we should beat them with a rod”, “if they are shameless enough to talk back to us, we should kill them”, “we must also stone people to death for heresy, adultery, homosexuality,working on the sabbath, practicing sorcery”
do not exist in that form any known version of the Holy Bible.
Also as a “Jesuitical graduate” you should know that Urban II called for Western Christians to serve as auxiliaries to the Christian Byzantine Emperor only after four and a half Centuries of Muslim aggression during which half (some historians claim two-thirds)of Christendom was overrun.
Further as a “Jesuitical” graduate you should know that modern scholarship based on extant Dominican records shows that over a 350-year period throughout the world wide Spanish Empire the Royal Inquisition of Spain turned over approximately 5,000 twice-condemned heretics to the secular arm with the plea that mercy be showed to them; of which approximately 2,500 were executed by the State. If you are worried about this historical fact then I am sure as a good “Jesuitical graduate” that you are also worried about 3,500 to 4,000 American babies murdered in their mothers’ wombs via surgical abortion every day.
Finally regarding your comment: “Also note not one Nazi was ever excommunicated” did not your Jesuit mentors have you read the Encyclical “Mit Brennender SorgePope” by Pius XI?
What is it now, 50 K a year to attend BC?
God bless
Richard W Comerford
BTW “Jesutical” has often been defined as: “practicing casuistry or equivocation; using subtle or oversubtle reasoning; crafty; sly; intriguing.”
The Holy Father comes right to the heart of the matter…“life is good…and protected by God”. We, as Catholics, are fortunate to have such wisdom available.
Richard W, you would benefit by rereading the Bible and a little studying of history might also be of help. In the space of time; Proverbs,13:24, 20:30, and 23:13-14; Leviticus 20:9, Deuteronomy 21:18-21, Mark 7:9-13 and Matthew 15:4-7.You might also refer to Deuteronomy 13:6,8-15…Exodus 21:7-11…and the quote from St. Paul is Ephesians 6:5
The rationale for the ‘crusades’ is not as important as the immorality of slaughtering, plundering, and numerous other evil atrocities…or does the end justify the means.
Indeed, many accused heretics were turned over to the state. That which was done was not for noble reasons as you state. In todays world Bush, Cheney, and Rumsfeld did the same(sending captives to other countries for water boarding), only now it is referred to as ‘extreme rendition’. Regardless, the end result torture.
No need to quote anything from Pius XI, the author of Casti Connubi, which speaks for itself…and along with Vatican I, infallibility decree, the church’s feet is forever set in cement, allowing no room to maneuver. Unable to adjust, adapt and incorporate the findings of science. In all progree ‘free thinking’ and ‘critical thought’ is a necessary imperative.
Pope: “Renounce Culture That Disguises Falsehood”
Everyone Else: ***sigh*** [holds up mirror]
Dear Mr. Jesuitical graduate of Boston College
“In the space of time; Proverbs,13:24, 20:30, and 23:13-14; Leviticus 20:9, Deuteronomy 21:18-21, Mark 7:9-13 and Matthew 15:4-7.You might also refer to Deuteronomy 13:6,8-15…Exodus 21:7-11…and the quote from St. Paul is Ephesians 6:5”
You did not in fact accurately and truly quote the above cited Biblical verses in your post in question, Very Jesuitical of you.
“The rationale for the ‘crusades’ is not as important as the immorality of slaughtering, plundering, and numerous other evil atrocities…or does the end justify the means.”
The Jesuits apparently forgot to tell you that we live in a fallen world and the reason in part the Church discourages war. except in exceptional circumstances, is that “evil atrocities” are committed by men and women stained and weaken3ed by Original Sin in all wars - to include the wars against Hitler and Imperial Japan.
“many accused heretics were turned over to the state. That which was done was not for noble reasons as you state”
Apparently the Jesuits, for 50 K a year, did not teach you to read very well either. I clearly posted that over a 350-year period in the Spanish Empire approximately 5,000 twice condemned heretics were turned over to the State of which about 2,500 were executed. I stated nothing regarding “noble reasons”.
“In todays world Bush, Cheney, and Rumsfeld did the same(sending captives to other countries for water boarding), only now it is referred to as ‘extreme rendition’.”
You should ask the Jesuits for your tuition money back. Although there is very strong evidence that that the U.S government reversed its previous no - torture policy there is to date no credible evidence that it executed any party. And the current Administration’s immoral war policies are, IMO, just as evil as the former Administrations.
“No need to quote anything from Pius XI, the author of Casti Connubi, which speaks for itself”
There is every need as “Mit Brennender SorgePope” is a clear and powerful condemnation of National Socialism and its racial ideology while “Casti Connubi” reenforces the Church teachings on Christian marriage which were under attack by Hitler. Did not the Jesuits require you to actually read these important documents?
“the church’s feet is forever set in cement, allowing no room to maneuver”
If you mean unable to maneuver to commit and endanger our immortal souls sin you are quite correct.
“Unable to adjust, adapt and incorporate the findings of science.”
Surely the good Jesuits taught you that the Catholic Church is the author of the University and the patron of science?
“In all progree ‘free thinking’ and ‘critical thought’ is a necessary imperative.”
And clearly wherever you were educated there was neither free nor critical thought. Did you take out student loans to attend BC? About $250,000.00 in total? Are you going to pay them back?
God bless
Richard W Comerford
Richard W, I shall fall upon the words of Carl Sagan, while you fall upon your petard. In his series ‘Cosmos’ Carl Sagan stated that religion has always been an impediment to science. The ancients had the knowledge, math etc., but they too were stymied by religion. “Science is a candle in the dark” as Sagan states, but the church certainly is belied by its legacy. When considering the truth of a proposition, one is either engaged in an honest appraisal of the evidence and logical arguments, or one isn’t. A rational person can knowingly will himself to believe a proposition for which he has no evidence.
Faith is belief without empirical evidence. Your method of discussion exposes you to ‘epistemic closure’, in which you are accustomed to preaching to or simply listening to the choir, tolerating no perceptions otherwise. Or to put it another way ‘take a trip on the Mobius strip’.
Thusly, I am in a quandry whether your post is pure nonsense, just silly cursory stuff. or an attempt to put us on with humor none of us will get.
Dear Mr. Jesuitical graduate of Boston College:
“I shall fall upon the words of Carl Sagan, while you fall upon your petard.”
You mean the fanatical supporter of the murder of unborn children who described an unborn child as a “pig like” “parasite”?
“religion has always been an impediment to science”
This is from the guy (Sagan) who spent a lot of the taxpayers’ dollars on “researching” extraterrestrial life and flying saucers?
“Science is a candle in the dark” as Sagan states, but the church certainly is belied by its legacy.”
It was science which gave us Hiroshima and Nagasaki and the scientific dehumanization of Jews (and babies). It is the Church which has condemned the destruction of cites, the holocaust and abortion.
“When considering the truth of a proposition, one is either engaged in an honest appraisal of the evidence and logical arguments”
You mean like in a life long search for little green men and their flying saucers at taxpayers’ expense?
“Faith is belief without empirical evidence.”
The blind see. The deaf hear. The dumb speak. And the dead rise. This is not gaining knowledge by means of direct and indirect observation or experience?
“Your method of discussion exposes you to ‘epistemic closure’.”
Again your Jesuit education is showing. I made no faith based arguments. I merely pointed out that you misquoted scripture.
“I am in a quandry whether your post is pure nonsense, just silly cursory stuff. or an attempt to put us on with humor none of us will get.”
You allege you graduated from Boston College yet you cannot in the age of the computer accurately quote Scripture, you know nothing of the Crusades and the Inquisition and cite as an intellectual authority an advocate for baby killing, little green men and flying saucers. The quarter million dollars spent on your education was clearly wasted. Are you at least employed after 4-years of expensive Jesuit education?
God bless
Richard W Comerford
Richard W, I always appreciate it when one takes the time to understand me…especially the ad hominem approach. Not only am I under attack but your vitriol savors the likes of notables such as Carl Sagan…I’m sure there are many others on your list. With no doubt, asking an objective query from you is tantamount to asking the pope to love heretics. Can you identify who it is that keeps you in the dark. Possibly Voltaire who states; “Every man is a creature of the age in which he lives, and few are able to raise themselves above the ideas of their time.” Have you substituted ‘authority and power’ of the church, replacing an earnest quest for truth. Obviously, you are not equipped to rise above your church indoctrination, which in the manner of Tertullian neither wants you to read or think for yourself lest you might ‘ask questions’. Even more obvious is the indoctrination you have received is nothing more than a ‘license people give to one another to keep believing when reasons fail’. What a tangled mess our brain weaves with irrational thoughts.
What a tangled mess our brain weaves with irrational thoughts.
Truth in autobiographical form :0
Mr. Jesuitical graduate of Boston College:
“I always appreciate it when one takes the time to understand me”
You are an anonymous poster with a foolish handle who also wants folks to “understand” him? Were you a psych major at the Jesuit’s Boston College?
“especially the ad hominem approach”
I believe it was you who made an anonymous but public attack on the Vicar of Christ.
“but your vitriol savors the likes of notables such as Carl Sagan”
Notable for what? Advocating child murder? Looking for little green men and their flying saucers? It was you, the public yet anonymous critic of Benedict XVI, who trotted Sagan out as an intellectual and moral authority.
“I’m sure there are many others on your list”
NO. Just Carl Sagan. Any wacko who spends his career at the taxpayers’ expense looking for little green men while advocating the murder of human children is a bloody handed jerk.
“Possibly Voltaire who states; ‘Every man is a creature of the age in which he lives, and few are able to raise themselves above the ideas of their time’.”
Great. Voltaire. Another guy with an ocean of blood on his hands. The correct quote is: “Every man, as to character, is the creature of the age in which he lives. Very few are able to raise themselves above the ideas of their times.” Did not the Jesuits teach you anything at Boston College for your quarter of a million dollars?
“Have you substituted ‘authority and power’ of the church, replacing an earnest quest for truth.”
A quest for the truth of little green men and their flying saucers or in which ocean of blood can we drown more innocents?
“Obviously, you are not equipped to rise above your church indoctrination, which in the manner of Tertullian neither wants you to read or think for yourself lest you might ‘ask questions’.”
Your Jesuit education is showing again. This is the guy who asked so many questions that he embraced Montanism and left the Church. Right?
“license people give to one another to keep believing when reasons fail”.
Why did the Jesuits bother to spend 4-years at $250,00.00 teaching you how to anonymously post quotes without citing the source? You must have been a theology major. Either that or you are now at BC Law.
God bless
Richard W Comerford
Jesuitical graduate of Boston College,
All the elaborate long books written by “learned” people won’t explain away one thing.
The Church has never reversed any of Her Teachings in the 2000-plus years She has been on the earth. That is an enigma in human organizations. And the reason for this is that the Church is Not simply a human organization, It is also a Divine organization. Christ can neither deceive or be deceive - and so His Church. Christ didn’t say you guys go build a Church, He said “you are rock (Peter) and on this rock I will build (notice the I) My Church (notice the “My)”. ” Loyalty to the Vicar of Christ is loyalty to Christ.”
And one more thing Jesus Christ rose from the dead. He Is Alive. Somehow (actually I do know how)
Some “learned” People forget that. And He is on earth, He Is Really Present In the Holy Eucharist. Some how “learned” people forget that too.
how simple it is.
Now before you say oh David your so simple. I say that I am, but I’m also rich in understanding. There is no possible way
you know more science than I.
David, “There is no possible way that you know more science than I.”
The issue David is not whether I know more science than you, but whether you know science at all. The Roman church has not existed more than 2000 years. The early church was a Xtian Jewish sect, led by St. James. Apostolic succession is a fiction. Xt never founded a church. He did not know what a church was. Xt went to a temple, was born a Jew, educated as a Jew, lived and died as a Jew. He promised before the generation died out, the Kingdom would come. St. Paul believed the same, that the kingdom would occur in his lifetime…hope that the Kool Aid you drank did not leave a sour taste.
You are deeply confused.
Sigh…my husband left BC with his faith certainly not solidified, but not in shatters as in the case of “Jesuitical”.
That was back in the mid sixties. But he had some wonderful Jesuit professors as well.
Things certainly seem to have deteriorated since then. It makes me wonder if “Jesuitical” is a hoax. Let’s say, it makes me hope that “Jesuitical” is a hoax…
All is not lost, Faith. There are good professors at BC, I.E. Peter Kreeft. (and I agree with you insight on h—x).
Faith and David; all is not lost…at least for me. BC proudly in its mandate; ‘ever to excel’ proclaimed that none of its motto would be realized if ‘free thinking’ and ‘critical reasoning’ did not rule or was stifled. Unfortunately, the present day bishops prefer to cry for ‘religious liberty’, instead of correctly stating its position as ‘religious intolerance’. Indeed, the church can preach whatever it wishes from its pulpits, but it ought not be allowed to infringe on the rights of others. As our Founding Fathers rightfully proclaim; we are a nation of cultural diversity, respecting all creeds, and thought whether we agree or not. The Roman church has no respect for any of this only that its opinion prevails. The Enlightenment, of which our Founding Fathers were well aware, as noted in the Constitution; substituted out religion and superstion for science and reason…therein lies the candle of science which lights up the darkness.
A wise man seeks the ‘truth’ where the truth lies[sic], not where he wishes to put it. The bishops usurpation of the church is the darkest of shadows passing over America; academic freedom would be lost, contrary thinking is assailed, rigidity of intolerance grows ever stronger(spirit of inquisition ever increases in the CDF), individualism is slaughtered(sins of Modernism - so says Pius X), transcendentalism poses as science, and superstition is affirmed.
You really need to watch this video, all the way to the end. It is a real eye opener. It is by FATHER PAUL KRAMER.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QoPi5p8_cXI&feature=related
Mr. Jesuitical graduate of Boston College:
“The Roman church has not existed more than 2000 years.”
Are you making a faith based argument again or do you have empirical evidence to support your claim?
“The early church was a Xtian Jewish sect, led by St. James. Apostolic succession is a fiction.”
St James was killed by King Herod> Kind of hard to lead a sect when you are dead.
Xt never founded a church.He did not know what a church was.
Well I would hoe not. The word Church is Old English, taken from the Old German, which was taken in turn from Indo-European. But the root word means to swell or spread out. And Christ’s followers have certainly spread out all over the world.
“Xt went to a temple, was born a Jew, educated as a Jew, lived and died as a Jew.”
The same sources for your claim add that He rose from the dead.
“He promised before the generation died out, the Kingdom would come. St. Paul believed the same, that the kingdom would occur in his lifetime”
And your empirical evidence for this claim is?
“…hope that the Kool Aid you drank did not leave a sour taste.”
Hope you can get your money ($250,000.00 ?) back from the Jesuits. BTW did you know that the Society of Jesus holds that under natural law that education and knowledge are free gifts which can neither be bought or sold?
God bless
Richard W Comerford
Richard W, by now you must be getting dizzy running around in circles looking every thing up…reading your posts is like reading a day old newspaper. For one you have the wrong ‘James’. James, the brother of Jesus led the early church( which again you have wrong; ekklesia, a greek word for church simply means ‘gathering’, not the nonsense you spew)...Peter, who was never pope was a go between for James and Paul. Paul recognized Peter as the ‘world’s greatest hypocrit’. It does seem that you in actuality have something in common with the Roman church, as neither of you have any concern for the ‘truth’.
Not only did the Xt promise that the kingdom would be on hand before this generation died out; it was stated that before all the disciples died or before they were able to visit all of Judea, the second coming would be. There was no need to found a ‘church’ as we now know it.
Leo I, was the first pope as we now know them. The early Xtians were led by the four or five patriarchs, who all were vying for leadership, quarreling amongst themselves, excommunicating one another for heresy.
Mr Jesuitical graduate of Boston College:
“BC proudly in its mandate; ‘ever to excel’ proclaimed that none of its motto would be realized if ‘free thinking’ and ‘critical reasoning’ did not rule or was stifled.”
Only from 1967 when BC and 250 other formerly Catholic Colleges agreed to abandon Catholicism in exchange for federal money. (See Land O’ Lakes Statement). In exchange for Caesar’s thirty pieces of silver BC has since turned out several generations of ignorant anti-Catholic bigots.
“Unfortunately, the present day bishops prefer to cry for ‘religious liberty’, instead of correctly stating its position as ‘religious intolerance’.”
Protesting the racist murder of 3-4,000 American babies a day is ‘religious intolerance’?
“Indeed, the church can preach whatever it wishes from its pulpits, but it ought not be allowed to infringe on the rights of others.”
No one, not even a Jesuit, has a right to murder children.
“As our Founding Fathers rightfully proclaim; we are a nation of cultural diversity, respecting all creeds, and thought whether we agree or not.”
Your Jesuit education is showing again. No Founding Father ever uttered the phrase: “cultural diversity”.
“The Roman church has no respect for any of this only that its opinion prevails.”
True. The Roman Church has no respect for the advocacy of child murder.
“The Enlightenment, of which our Founding Fathers were well aware, as noted in the Constitution; substituted out religion and superstion for science and reason…”
Your Jesuit education is showing again. There is no mention in the US Constitution of the “Enlightenment” nor the purported” substituted out religion and superstion for science and reason…”
“therein lies the candle of science which lights up the darkness.”
Kind of like at Hiroshima and Nagasaki?
“The bishops usurpation of the church is the darkest of shadows passing over America”
And who did the Bishops purportedly usurp the Church from…the Society of Jesus?
“academic freedom would be lost”
You mean the Jesuits would allow Catholicism to be actually taught at Boston College again?
“contrary thinking is assailed”
You mean folks could openly assail the murder of children at BC again?
“rigidity of intolerance grows ever stronger”
Yes. No more child murder.
(spirit of inquisition ever increases in the CDF)
I would hope so. Inquisition means inquiry or interrogation. It is their job.
“individualism is slaughtered(sins of Modernism - so says Pius X)”
Is this claim in the US Constitution also?
“transcendentalism poses as science, and superstition is affirmed.”
Yup. That would accurately describe Boston College today.
God bless
Richard W Comerford
Dear Mr. Jesuitical graduate of Boston College:
“Richard W, by now you must be getting dizzy running around in circles looking every thing up…reading your posts is like reading a day old newspaper.”
No. Your attacks on the Church are standard, boiler plate anti-Catholic bigotry. Centuries old. Nothing original. For $250,000.00 one would think that the Jesuits would have taught you some original bigotry.
“For one you have the wrong ‘James’. James, the brother of Jesus led the early church”
You claim that St. James was not murdered by King Herod and that he continued to lead the “early church”. I thought you claimed above that Jesus did not establish a Church?
“( which again you have wrong; ekklesia, a greek word for church simply means ‘gathering’, not the nonsense you spew)”...
It may be nonsense but it is documented nonsense. You claimed that Jesus did not establish nor know what a “Church” was. The word Church is a modern word from the Old English, from the Old German from the hold Indo-European. the root word means to spread or swell out. Consult Mr. Google. The Jesuits did introduce you to the internet did they not?
“Peter, who was never pope was a go between for James and Paul.”
Well. “Pope” means “papa”. There were and “papas” in Christianity. You should know that. As for Saint Peter being a “go-between” there is no mention of this purported function in either Holy Scripture or any other extant primary contemporary document. But the “go-between” claim is pretty standard anti-Catholic bigotry.
“Paul recognized Peter as the ‘world’s greatest hypocrit’.”
St Paul never called St Peter “the ‘world’s greatest hypocrit” you are making Bible verses up again.
“It does seem that you in actuality have something in common with the Roman church, as neither of you have any concern for the ‘truth’.”
Are you making another one of your faith based arguments without empirical evidence again?
“Not only did the Xt promise that the kingdom would be on hand before this generation died out; it was stated that before all the disciples died or before they were able to visit all of Judea, the second coming would be.”
Christ’s description of His Kingdom (mustard seed) and your definition of Kingdom are radically different. I prefer to trust Christ’s description over your definition.
“There was no need to found a ‘church’ as we now know it.”
Who is “we”. Do you mean elderly Jesuits pinning away for the “Spirit” of Vatican II?
“Leo I, was the first pope as we now know them.”
Do you mean Leo the Great (c. 391 AD – 461 AD) who was famous for, among other things, defending the successors to Peter? THAT Pope Leo? Kind of ironic. Your claim is also very, very old anti-Catholic nativist bigotry.
“The early Xtians were led by the four or five patriarchs, who all were vying for leadership, quarreling amongst themselves, excommunicating one another for heresy.”
As mentioned above the title “pope” (lie patriarch) is not unique to the Bishop of Rome. The interesting thing is that so many of these early Christian leaders, who you so enjoy demeaning, died for the same Faith which you and the other elderly Jesuits so clearly reject.
God bless
Richard W Comerford
As the brilliant Jesuit Arthur MacGillivray SJ, once stated; I’d rather sink my teeth into a steak than marshmallow fluff. He must have had you in mind. Then again for your obsession with my immaculate education at BC,
there could be a perscription waiting for you. The malady is treatable.
BC like all erudite institutions of learning rises above the mediocrity you insist upon. My love for courses in logic and epistemology do not lend themselves to your ‘folly of faith’.
Dead Mr. Jesuitical graduate of Boston College:
“As the brilliant Jesuit Arthur MacGillivray SJ, once stated; I’d rather sink my teeth into a steak than marshmallow fluff. He must have had you in mind.”
You mean the deceased poet? A contemporary of yours? So you must be another elderly, embittered Jesuit angry with the Pope because the vaunted Neo-Pagan world promised by the purported “Spirit” of Vatican II did not come about?
“Then again for your obsession with my immaculate education at BC,
there could be a perscription waiting for you. The malady is treatable.”
The malady is called Original Sin. The prescription is called grace.
“BC like all erudite institutions of learning rises above the mediocrity you insist upon.”
I do not know if you have looked out of your ivory tower lately but most BC grads cannot find a white collar job with their 4-year Jesuit degree. Half of BC Law grads can NEVER find work as a lawyer. But they approach a million dollars in debt for their BC-Jesuit education.
“My love for courses in logic and epistemology do not lend themselves to your ‘folly of faith’.”
Making up quotes from the US Constitution and Holy Scripture does not contribute to either the study of knowledge or logic.
God bless
Richard W Comerford
Richard W., how would you compare your degree from ‘google’ with my degrees from Boston College.
Dead Mr. Jesuitical graduate of Boston College:
“how would you compare your degree from ‘google’ with my degrees from Boston College.”
Ah! Scribes and Pharisee time is it? Or ‘look at how wonderful I am with my degrees from old BC’. But it is really not a matter of my comparing your degrees from Boston College, whatever they are,with Mr. Google’s expertise. Rather, is it really a matter of my comparing you, whoever you are (most likely an elderly Jesuit) with that guy who you like to criticize. You know. The guy named Ratzinger?
Ratzinger, by all accounts a very gentle and learned man, is probably the world’s greatest living theologian. He is also the Vicar of Christ. And, therefore, gets a little help from Someone called the Holy Spirit (or if you prefer the Holy Ghost).
And that makes Ratzinger, in any comparison with an anonymous, online Jesuit, the hands down winner.
God bless
Richard W Comerford
Richard W., if there is a spirit guiding you and the Roman church, it certainly is not a holy one. When the cardinals go into conclave to elect a knew pope, they do so expecting the guidance of the spirit. Now which popes do you think the spirit has selected. The average American president is a better person than the average pope…so says Gary Wills.
Do you believe in other spirits, extraterrestials, like guardian angels, demons. Do you believe that Xt thought those who were epileptic needed demons exorcized, and that people were ill because they sinned. These ancients were weirdly superstitious and were told to go and sin no more. So, does your affirmations guide you to believe in myths and superstitions. Otherwise, there is a way out for yourself, if you would attempt to understand Bayes’s Theorem,... apply the theories of probability and statistics to Biblical histories as to whether they are factual or not…that is if you have any predilection for garnering the truth. Science’s way of lighting a candle keeps you from the prevailing ‘shadows of darkness; to which you have knelt.
Dear Mr. Jesuitical graduate of Boston College:
“if there is a spirit guiding you and the Roman church, it certainly is not a holy one. When the cardinals go into conclave to elect a knew pope, they do so expecting the guidance of the spirit. Now which popes do you think the spirit has selected. The average American president is a better person than the average pope…so says Gary Wills.”
Gary Wills is (surprise, surprise) another embittered ex-Jesuit who fanatically supports our government’s racist and murderous abortion holocaust. When he is not focused on killing black babies he is promoting perverse and unnatural sexual practices. Mr. Wills is also an ardent opponent of the Papacy. Your kind o guy.
“Do you believe in other spirits, extraterrestials, like guardian angels, demons.”
The Catholic Church holds that an angel is a pure spirit. A demon or a devil is a fallen angel. However an extraterrestrial is a being beyond or not of this earth; and to my knowledge the Church does not address the question of corporal extraterrestrials.
“Do you believe that Xt thought those who were epileptic needed demons exorcized”
No. Christ did not teach us that every epileptic was possessed by demons. The Jesuits have misinformed you again.
“and that people were ill because they sinned.”
No. Christ did not teach us that every person who suffered from an illness suffered because the suffering person had committed a sin which triggered said illness. The Jesuits have misinformed you once again.
“These ancients were weirdly superstitious and were told to go and sin no more.”
The moderns are wildly superstitious. And Christ has commanded us all not to sin.
“So, does your affirmations guide you to believe in myths and superstitions.”
You mean the “myths and superstitions” held by Gary Wills?
Otherwise, there is a way out for yourself, if you would attempt to understand Bayes’s Theorem,... apply the theories of probability and statistics to Biblical histories as to whether they are factual or not…that is if you have any predilection for garnering the truth.
Again the Jesuits and ex-Jesuit Gary Wills have misinformed you. Thomas Bayes (1701–1761 AD) applied his theory to the sciences and to the law. Not to religion. Miracles are supernatural events outside of the natural law and therefore are unpredictable.
“Science’s way of lighting a candle keeps you from the prevailing ‘shadows of darkness; to which you have knelt.”
Yes those were big candles that science lit at Hiroshima and Nagasaki and they have cast long shadows of darkness over mankind.
God bless
Richard W Comerford
Richard W., perhaps if you read Richard Carriers book on Bayes’s Theorem, on finding the historical Jesus you might be better informed than continually shooting yourself in the foot…hope that foot is not resting in your mouth. If you require futher proof that you are wildly swinging at pitches; angels and demons are extraterrestials as is God. You are particularly ‘loose footed’ regarding Bayes’s Theorem effecting religion. e.g. if any transcendental impacts the natural world that result can be tested by science. To date there is zero empirical data known to earnest scientific scholarship inwhich a supernatural being affects anything natural…your boat is too far away from the pier to be called back to reality.
Dear Mr. Jesuitical graduate of Boston College:
“perhaps if you read Richard Carriers book on Bayes’s Theorem, on finding the historical Jesus you might be better informed than continually shooting yourself in the foot…hope that foot is not resting in your mouth.”
Author Richard Carrier, like all of your heroes a fanatical proponent of child murder, proposes, contrary to Bayes himself that Bayes’s theory can be used in the realm of religion. (How does one predict a supernatural event?)Author Carriers has many critics to include other militant atheists, who point out that any theoretical model depending on statistics cannot be used on a broad subject like religion. Again your Jesuit masters did not teach you well.
“If you require futher proof that you are wildly swinging at pitches; angels and demons are extraterrestials as is God.”
So you now admit that God, angels, demons and the supernatural exist. (Unlike your bloody handed heroes Voltaire, Sagan and Carrier.)And if God, angels, demons and the supernatural exists then certainly so can the miracles described in Holy Scripture.
“You are particularly ‘loose footed’ regarding Bayes’s Theorem effecting religion. e.g. if any transcendental impacts the natural world that result can be tested by science.”
On the Contrary. Bayes himself disagrees with you and your murderous friends. If you actually read Bayes (did you) you would realize that Bayes himself did not hold that his theorem could be applied to religion.
“To date there is zero empirical data known to earnest scientific scholarship inwhich a supernatural being affects anything natural”
You just stated above in the same post that God, angels and demons, all supernatural beings exist. How could any scientist prove that your now admittedly supernatural beings do not interact with the natural world? How “can any scientist prove that God, who you admit exists, cannot perform miracles?
your boat is too far away from the pier to be called back to reality”
The reality is that scientists are frequently wrong, incompetent, dishonest, arrogant, proud and as greedy for fame and fortune as any other human being. You have placed your faith in petty, fallible and mortal little men. While a follower of Jesus Christ places his faith in a perfect, all just, all merciful and all loving immortal God.
Clearly you are a product of a Jesuit education.
God bless
Richard W Comerford
Clearly Richard W., you have a major problem with reading comphrehension. It was you who had defined extraterrestials as not being of this earth, as if that explanation was not dwelling on the obvious. From that definition you excluded angels and demons. My response is a reference to the subjunctive, if what you state is true then angels, demons, and alas a god would also be included in that definition, but you are lost in the folly of your belief. The problem is a transcendental figure having a impact on the natural world. You insist that it cannot be tested, yet you postulate that it has occured and indeed miracles happen. That for your erudition ‘can be tested’. A resulting effect from a god or transcendental figure would have an impact…that outcome would be a realm of science. You like so many other people of the pews read only to that which affirms already held opinions. Laplace refined Bayes’s Theorem, most scientist today attest to its value…you are the antithesis of a scientist. You belong to the ancient realm in those days of Biblical yore that ascribed to magicians, sorcerers, divination, and exorcists. A god was always assigned to fill in the gaps. Well science has closed those gaps and a natural explanation suffices.
When it rained, a god was pleased; when in a drought a god needed to be appeased…sacrifice was the offering. The god of Israel required an offering of the ‘first son’. Xt the ‘lamb of god’ was propitiary for sin…as if a god would offer a son to be slaughtered, and killing that son all other sins would be forgiven. St. Augustine made up Original Sin.
The Hebrew Bible does not discuss ‘Original Sin’ nor did they believe in it. Their expected messiah was not a redeemer, but an anointed king, a Xt, to restore their rightful place.
Is evolution, a well established scientific fact, beyond you too. The early Jewish god indeed evolved from a barbaric warlike, cruel god to a god who coincided with the scientific progress of man. Some early Xtians stated that god could not be the same god we worship, there must have been some other god. To date there has been no scientific findings in proof of any angel, demon or whatever effecting any change at all on the natural world; no miracles, no apparitions, no transcendentals taking human form and impregnating women and fathering a race of giants as Genesis claims. No findings or traces of Jews in Egypt, no traces of wanderings in the desert for forty years…only carry over is a belief in myths and superstition…as you can see the pope has many ‘falsehoods’ disguised as ‘truths’ which need to be addressed and corrected.
Dear Mr. Jesuitical graduate of Boston College:
“Clearly Richard W., you have a major problem with reading comphrehension. It was you who had defined extraterrestials as not being of this earth”
Sorry. No. I did not: “and to my knowledge the Church does not address the question of corporal extraterrestrials’.
“From that definition you excluded angels and demons”
Sorry. No. I did not:‘The Catholic Church holds that an angel is a pure spirit. A demon or a devil is a fallen angel.’
“if what you state is true then angels, demons, and alas a god would also be included in that definition”
The Catholic Church teaches that God,the angels and demons are pure spirits. After the Incarnation Christ, the Second Person of the Blessed Trinity became True Man.
“yet you postulate that it has occured and indeed miracles happen”
The Catholic Church holds that the Gospels were written under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, the Third Person of the Blessed Trinity; and that the witnesses to Christ’s miracles speak truly.
“Laplace refined Bayes’s Theorem, most scientist today attest to its value…you are the antithesis of a scientist.”
Mr. Bayes disagrees with Mr. Laplace’s refinement of his (Bayes) theory.
“You belong to the ancient realm in those days of Biblical yore that ascribed to magicians, sorcerers, divination, and exorcists.”
Sorry the Jesuits mislead you. The Catholic Church holds that “magicians, sorcerers, divination,” are false and superstitious.
“Well science has closed those gaps and a natural explanation suffices.”
Science depends on scientists who like all men lie steal cheat and murder. Which is why ‘science’ frequently changes its mind on issue it once claimed were unchangeable.
“When it rained, a god was pleased; when in a drought a god needed to be appeased…sacrifice was the offering.”
Sorry. The Jesuits mislead you. The Catholic Church does not hold with these things.
“The god of Israel required an offering of the ‘first son”’
And yet an Angel held back Abraham’s hand.
“Xt the ‘lamb of god’ was propitiary for sin…as if a god would offer a son to be slaughtered, and killing that son all other sins would be forgiven.”
Exactly. Christians follow a God of Love who would sacrifice His only Begotten Son for us.
The Hebrew Bible does not discuss ‘Original Sin’ nor did they believe in it…“St. Augustine made up Original Sin.”
And all this time I thought there was an Adam and Eve, the Garden of Paradise, a Tree of Good and Evil and a Serpent in the Old Testament. Yo were clearly well informed by the Jesuits.
“The early Jewish god indeed evolved from a barbaric warlike, cruel god to a god who coincided with the scientific progress of man.”
Second Article of the Apostles’ Creed: ‘—God did not abandon man after Adam fell into sin, but promised to send into the world a Saviour to free man from his sins and to reopen to him the gates of heaven.” Yup. That sounds like a terrible barbaric God.
“To date there has been no scientific findings in proof of any angel, demon or whatever effecting any change at all on the natural world; no miracles, no apparitions, no transcendentals taking human form and impregnating women and fathering a race of giants as Genesis claims.”
To date the squabbling, very fallible and so very human scientists, despite massive governments grants of taxpayers’ money, have failed to disprove the supernatural.
“No findings or traces of Jews in Egypt, no traces of wanderings in the desert for forty years…only carry over is a belief in myths and superstition”
No findings or traces in the fossil record of man’s Darwinian evolutionary development over a billion years or so. There should be trillions of evolutionary humanoid remains in the fossil record if Mr. Darwin is correct. All we can find is an occasional and very controversial tooth, or bone fragment which is then argued over endlessly. On the other hand there are Egyptian records extant, contemporary to the Jews being held in Egypt, which attest to their presence in that country. I guess the Jesuits forgot to teach you that too.
“as you can see the pope has many ‘falsehoods’ disguised as ‘truths’ which need to be addressed and corrected.”
No I cannot see that the Holy Father has any falsehoods disguised as truths. I can see that all of your particular scientific heroes are bloody handed murderers who fanatically advocate the eugenic slaughter of innocents.In you case, and in the cases of your murderous scientific heroes, Hitler clearly won the Second World War.
God bless
Richard W Comerford
Oh my Lord, those words are so precise and beautiful. The Pope just described, absolutely, the crisis that is taking so many people away from God. The liar leaders using misconceptions to manipulate morality and culture the filth.
Leosdel…‘precise and beautiful’. You mean the pope using the word ‘truths’
incorrectly, substituting it for the proper word ‘beliefs’.
Post a Comment
By submitting this form, you give The National Catholic Register permission to publish this comment. Comments will be published at our discretion, and may be edited for clarity and length. For best formatting, please limit your response to one paragraph and don't hit "enter" to force line breaks.