I read that on his tweet and am disappointed with his slapstick trying to be more popular comments. Thats hollywood stereo type for you. The biggest hypocrites are hollywood themselves. Half a dozen are closet gays acting pretending get married but behind closed doors they are just GAY behind the backs of their wives n kids. Then later in life when career is dwindling they come out after years of leading people on. Its despicable. Sad for the women and children cos it is traumatic. This is in showbiz all over the world. Some women know but don’t mind it   For the sake of being in the limelight or to be married to someone rich and powerful or famous. This is the sad truth. What can one expect when Obama does the hollywood fashion. Anything to be famous. I pray that catholics if they truly believe in the word of God they must not acknowledge what is written for catholics christians alike.  Never compromise our faith to love christ is to follow is word. Jim Carrey can say what he wants perhaps he should become gay and eradicate all of womanhood. As God made Adam and Eve otherwise we would all not be here. It was never Adam and Dave or Eve and Jane. Basta!
I have many gay friends. They are human beings like all of us but it is the act in itself that i believe is against Adam and Eve and the innocence of children. There would be no you or me in this world without Eve. Man and woman is what it is. I pray this world does not fall into great anarchy and loose morals that only destroys the very soul of innocence our children’sstate of mind. We definitely need God in our lives more than ever. Noone cares what the straight folks truly feel ? They are not comfortable especially a straight parent when Gay men hide behind the holy robe or as teachers in sports schools or any place close to young men. So many sad cases. This is a reality check. I am sure they are quick to judge the church but look around us. I am sure not all gay men are that evil to raped and distort young men but men dont tell unlike women. Perhaps years later for fear of shame and being called cissy coward why not fight back. This is the tragedy the sad truth. In Asia professional men gay men go around looking for young men n boys paying for sex. They are not pedophiles but gay men. A man who rapes a girl is a rapist. I am a catholic not perfect cos i am not God but i love my faith and i am so sad by so much sadness in the world today. How do we protect children how?

Jim is very wrong.  So many times we miss the point. The Church are the people also.  If it’s remembers do something wrong it is not all the people it is that person.  THAT IS SUCH A SIMPLE CONCEPT. . . .YOU HAVE TO UNDERSTAND THAT.  YOU SAID SOMETHING JIM THAT HURT ME AS A CATHOLIC.  DID YOU stop and realize that.  You don’t even know me.  Just stop and think about how many apologies you have to deliver. I am Catholic because I know that God is with them. I know this because I KNOW GOD.  WHY NOT THINK ABOUT THE GOOD IN PEOPLE AND WRITE JOKES ABOUT THAT, BUT IT WILL ONLY SALE ON THE CHRISTAIN WEB-SITES.  THANK YOU. . . .

Don’t be too hard on Jim, there are many ignorant ex-Catholics who will never receive the gift of faith, the TRUE one. Like an angry step-child they will rail & rant against the gift-giver, sadly missing out on the greatest adventure of all. I too was a prodigal, but was given the grace of conversion and made it back in the nick of time.  Thankyou Jesus, especially in the Sacrament of Love, and for bringing this pilgrim home to Rome.

The Lord did say Many will come in my name and this is an important line in the bible for us all to remember. Afterall we are only man and woman Not God but becos we believe and if we do love Christ we should know better. Yes we are all sinners but that does not mean carry on sining? The media and non believers are quick to judge the church but truth will prevail if we truly believe in our faith. Courage strength and prayer is our way forward.  Lent is a month of great patience trials and sacrifices. God bless and we shall pray for Jim too

I am a fan cos he is funny in his movies but it sure is disappointing to read his tweets he does rant on :) quite abit.

The only solution is to pray for this mans conversion thru the intercession of our most Holy Mother…..sad but true, just a few years ago I was in Mr Carreys shoes, a misguided, misinformed fallen away Catholic.  Then a friend gave me the book “Medjugorje the Message” by wayne weible, well let us just say the rest is history!!!

Here’s the problem in a nutshell.  Way, way, way, down deep inside, these folks know in their heart of hearts that the Catholic Church is Christ’s institution on earth for Truth and eternal life.  Because of that, they rail against it and hate it, because they they are not willing to live the kind of life necessary to obtain those gifts.  Rather than submit, their pride wells up and they attack the very institution that can help lead them to the peace and love they are so desperately searching for.  The enemy is quite satisfied when he is able to twist the human heart like this.

Imagine if celebrities tweeted ugly stuff about Muslims or Jews…

@TheresaEH

Medjugorje is NOT an approved apparition by the Church! Please take the time to read this:

http://olrl.org/prophecy/medjugorje.shtml

If you are looking at approved apparitions you can look at Our Lady of Fatima and Our Lady of Lourdes to name a few.

God love you,

Bugd

Help me out on this, please.  Who on earth could care a fig about what this imbecilic nonentity has to say about anything, let alone the Church?  Is this even worth wasting internet space on?

‘People hate religion, they despise it, and they fear that it is true.’ -Pascal?

“. . . the Catholic Church only accepts volunteers. So I don’t understand why there’s all this hatred for the Catholic Church.”

If this is a serious statement expressing a lack of understanding, I can help. The short answer is that the Catholic Church throws its weight around in the world of politics.

In the U.S. the bishops lobbied for the Affordable Care Act. Now they are fighting in the courts for the right of corporations to cite conscience as a reason to deny non-Catholics the right to health care insurance that covers contraception and sterilization. Always and everywhere the Catholic Church bankrolls and drums up support for anti-abortion laws. The Catholic Church has been prominent as an institution in opposing changes to the law that allow same sex couples to marry and adopt. Proposition 8 is a prime example of how the Catholic Church enjoys tax-free status as a religious institution while participating in political activities that should be off-limits. To top it off, U.S. tax payers foot the security bill when the Pope decides to visit.

Now, you can reply that “The church has a right . . . yada yada yada.” Well, yes it does, at least as long as it can get away with the tax dodge involved. And if it were taxed, it would have a clear right to jump in there and mix it up with legislators. But please don’t pretend to be surprised that such political activity evokes strong negative reactions, especially from non-Catholics or former Catholics. Is it really a mystery why people rarely tweet mean things about Presyterians, or the UCC?

As former Catholic myself, I deeply resent the continuing interference of the Catholic Church in my life through its intrusion into political matters. You are free to tell me to take my feelings and stuff them, but of course I will continue to feel them, and to appreciate mean-spirited humor at the Church’s expense. Not that I find Carrey’s incoherent comments to be funny!

I am so sick of has beens like Jim Carrey and any Hollywood types.  Who cares what they think?  Too bad they don’t have the guts to attack Muslims. I do agree with the comment about the Catholic Church staying out of politics when it comes to government welfare programs but not in matters of immorality.

Matt,
Thanks for the great post!
.
I’ve seen how popular culture’s concept of “healthy” sexuality can ultimately leave a person empty and cheated.  I’m learning more and more about the fullness of God’s plan for us when we truly embrace his entire gift of our sexuality.
.
Also, awesome concept of our Church being one that is really only for volunteers.  Our faith can not just be seen as something that any of us are just born into.  It is not a birthright.  It is something that must be actively practiced each and every day.  I struggle every day with the opportunities I have been given to grow my faith.  So many times at the end of the day, I find myself seeking for forgiveness for all the areas in which I fell short… but, occasionally (and beautifully), I see the results of places where I have succeeded in living as a child of God.
.
Thanks for the post, Matt…

cowalker,
I think people tweet “mean” things more about Catholics than say Presbyterians because Catholic teaching doesn’t bend & sway to each passing social trend,therefore it seems a threat.
Actually, strict Calvinists are “beat up” on,too, in the UK for their un-hip stance on moral issues.Check the tweets & comment boxes for BBC Northern Ireland & you’ll see plenty of animosity & disrespect.Muslims aren’t popular, either in the UK, but folks are more hesitant to express their opinions about that.

jim carreys best when he acts like an idiot, he’s in true form with these tweets! But lets not get all twisted, he is just one more in the long line of cross haters. Rejoice in that!

Okay, Jim Carrey was just added to my “black list”. As a member of the Catholic Church, I feel personally insulted by his tweets.

Now, you can reply that “The church has a right . . . yada yada yada.” Well, yes it does, at least as long as it can get away with the tax dodge involved.

The IRS has pulled the tax-exempt status of exactly ONE denomination in twenty-five years. There is nothing underhanded being done by the Church in the examples cited. As far as appreciating the mean-spirited humor. To each his own, but most of the humor is based on lies and no one should appreciate that.

Alllllllllllllllllllllllrighty then! “The Incredible Burt Wonderstone” just fell off my “must-see” list.

Kathleen posted on Friday, Mar 1, 2013 12:23 PM (EST):cowalker,
“I think people tweet ‘mean’ things more about Catholics than say Presbyterians because Catholic teaching doesn’t bend & sway to each passing social trend,therefore it seems a threat.”

No, that’s not enough. Unbending teachings aren’t a threat until you have a wealthy and influential lobby trying to legislate those teachings into laws that bind believers and unbelievers alike. The Amish have been pretty set in their ways for a long, long time, but they don’t make people mad. Probably it’s because they aren’t trying to make cars and TV illegal for everybody.

I’m not familiar with attitudes toward Calvinists in Great Britain, but if they’re trying to make their morals the law of the land, then I’m sure they evoke the same anger as the Catholic Church in the U.S.

Let us not forget that he was the partner of someone who recently wrote Bad Habits: Confessions of a Recovering Catholic - Jenny McCarthy.

I think people should not be insulting right down to comedians. Respect is something that lacks in this world. And well it is true about whst some of you wrote here. If Jim Carrey wrote nasty things about Muslims he would be in serious trouble no doubt. I notice that all who have dwindling careers always try to do things to make the catholics look bad. God knows the first church under Jesus Christ his words his bible was is the catholic church built St Peter. Those who broke away adjusted the bible to suit their personal gain and needs nothing more. We are all human we make mistakes we are sinners not God but noone should compromise jesus words what he left those who believe. We try everyday to change ourselvs to be good that is the joy in itself. To love Christ is to serve him do good and not against his will.  The one thing i am proud of being a catholic is many believe in prayer and as it is lent these will be trying times. To catholics here dont be disheartened our father in heaven knows how to deal with all this nonsense In His Time.

Well, there goes another actor to take out from my list.  Me thinks he is hungering for some attention since his career is going down the drain real fast.  Has he been nominated for best actor recently…or ever?  Let’s all pray for him.  Hail Mary…

Cowalker, the Church has the right to speak to morality which it does; it is immoral to force a company that operates under religious tenets to go against them by forcing them to provide abortificients and pay for abortions. The Church advocates for traditional marriage as God created man and woman to procreate; look at the complementarity of male and female bodies. Only with male and female may children be born; marriage of man and woman predates government and is a way to tie parents to their children and is the best place to raise children. The Church knows that children do best in households with their natural mother and father which is why it opposes gay adoptions. It is immoral to kill babies. The Church speaks Truth to all which is why it is vilified.

The Church may not endorse a particular candidate.

Oh, and while you may be a lapsed Catholic, you’re Catholic forever. There’s no such thing as a former Catholic. You were baptized into the Church and baptism is forever. You may also have been Confirmed which is God’s seal.

“Here’s the problem in a nutshell.  Way, way, way, down deep inside, these folks know in their heart of hearts that the Catholic Church is Christ’s institution on earth for Truth and eternal life.  Because of that, they rail against it and hate it, because they they are not willing to live the kind of life necessary to obtain those gifts.  Rather than submit, their pride wells up and they attack the very institution that can help lead them to the peace and love they are so desperately searching for.”  Oh, come now, LarryW2LJ—that’s like saying that terrorists “hate freedom” and that’s why 9/11 happened.  Be wary of straw man arguments—better to deal directly with each specific claim made by the opposition than to re-characterize their positions and ignore their points.

well you only have to look at the source to know that these Hollwoodians are lost souls.  Look at what is being produced out of Hollywood that can only be described as demonic influence. Look at the lives of those who reside in that milieu. Glamor and glitter to many, but ugliness and sin in reality.  Our duty is to pray for those lost sheep who still have deep in their hearts the will to seek God.

I have never been Jim’s fan but I will pray for his soul.  Except for the Grace of God I could have believed some of the hateful things he believes.  The amazing thing about GOD is that He loves Jim.  I am still amazed HE loves me!!!

@TheAuthors: What I find INCREDIBLE is that the bros who wrote this take the time to take aim at Jim Carrey and gloss-over something patently OBVIOUS; namely, that the Holy Father DID receive a report in December that HE BOTH ORDERED TO BE CONDUCTED REGARDING “VATILEAKS” AND ALSO DEMANDED STAY SECRET; simultaneously, a faithful Polish priest, released his own evidence largely unheard of until the Italian news ran stories on the December report and his was titled: “IN UNION WITH THE POPE AGAINST THE HOMOHERESY.”  So, you tell me…Did the Holy Father take the December report as the last straw and realize that in truth and justice, the Church needed a younger man with more zeal and courage to destroy the Homoheresy???  This, I think, is THE REAL STORY of his final decision to abdicate the Chair of Peter.  Was it in fact?  We will NEVER know…The bottom line regarding Jim Carrey is THAT HE IS RIGHT!  This is unpopular, but absolutely true.  He is right because there are throngs of “papists” out there who cling to the office, not Christ.  There ARE 3-7% of the priests/bishops out there who ARE SKUNKS and the Popes over the past 30+ years have done precious little to show the world it is UNGODLY and frankly WE ARE ALL TIRED AS HELL AND DON’T WANT TO TAKE IT ANYMORE!!!

Does this mean the Church is wrong?  It is manifest that it does not.  Does this mean we should stop being Catholic?  No it does not.  Does this mean that Jim Carrey is wrong and that his edgy humor out of place?  No, certainly not…He is on the wrong side of Faith at the moment, but maybe if the Church, especially from Peter down through the Bishop would actually live-out their ordination instead of hiding behind their offices, people like Jim and Jenny might actually be inspired to come participate again.

I’ve been in Catholic media for nearly 20-years and I share Jim’s sentiments…In fact, I know most of my “faithful” friends and I are FED UP with the USCCB and the lack of obedient priests here in the US.  If not for the Most Blessed Sacrament, we would leave.  Yes, it is that bad.

And the guys who write this blog and this newspaper know it.  They simply lack the courage to say it for they fear the reprisal of the Bishops and “need their support.” You can read that: “30-pieces of Silver” as far as I’m concerned.

In the end, we all need penance and reconciliation.  We all need the Superviaticum which is Christ Himself.  WE NEED GENUINE LEADERSHIP!

Those who say: “The Church is only human” can kiss my large Irish ascot… Sin is one thing…The ocassional fall… What we are talking about here is not sin, it is persistent FAILURE…. Well, I could go on and on and on…

In the end, we just need to all repent and believe in the Gospel…

All I know is I quit watching the actor eons of years ago. I surmised immediately he was a sham within & without, w/o knowing his past religion of claim.
I am ignorant of him, & I’m glad I’ve knocked him out of my visual experience.

The ONLY epitome for what a Catholic Christian is can be found with His hands out-stretched on the cross.  Look no further for the measure of perfection within the church.  The rest of us, bishops, priests, popes, are all striving to get into Heaven, ior should be.  I hope this is the case for Jim Carrey.

Hypocrite, from the Greek, means actor. Look it up in the dictionary.

Jim Carry suffers from Bi-Polar this condition makes the person act in swings i.e. positive and negative - Its is interesting to read some of his interviews were he admits

He suffered from depression even at the peak of success, which he publicly acknowledged and asked for help. He acknowledged the “peaks and valleys” At a point when his mother was sick, he used to hit himself on the walls and let himself fall on the stairs.

As for his comment of not leaving a child with a priest - his relationship are nothing to be desired - divorced twice in and out of so many relationships that normailty eludes him

He is a person to be pitied and we should pray for him - as these rants are obviously another cry for help

He is a disturbed has-been.

Although we should not judge a person, our constant attitude should be one of humility, truth and love.  First, we have all said things we regret, so we cannot stand in judgment of Jim, but we can say that his tweets are disrespectful and he too is in no position to be the judge of anyone, that includes the Church!  Judge not, and you shall not be judged.  Instead, we all should be focused on prayer for the conversion and salvation of every soul, including Jim, and our own.

  It is amusing to me that children of the Aquarian Peace & Love Generation are beginning to talk about the rampant sexual abuse they experienced within that sub-culture, on communes, by gurus etc. It seems there were thousands of long haired, hip, ‘peace-loving’ predators feasting on the young. Sexual ‘freedom’ is very expensive and always was.

Jim,  ( Hopefully you are reading this)

  Please consider using your talents to bring others to Christ. You are expending energies that could best be used to convert so many. Each of us has a mission—each of us may have been a prodigal son or daughter—No matter—Jesus loves you and is welcoming you with open arms.  He is the Divine Mercy and will bestow many graces on you if you but ask. He did teach that he who is without sin could throw the first stone. None of us can do that Jim—just beg for His forgiveness and repent of your sins as we must all do. What a model for everyone you then would be! Consider conversion while you still have breath.    Thank you for listening.  Elizabeth

That Jim Carrey thing: I always thought that the movie “Dumb and Dumber” was autobiographical for him… now I’m sure of it.

MATTHEW ARCHBOLD may want to call it “theory that some super secret gay cabal” but most of the abuses and cover ups were homosexual. As for Jim Carrey, why are we wasting ink time on him?

Jim Carrey has become a wolf in clown’s clothing!

Did he tweet anything when Hollywood gave Roman Polanski, convicted of raping a child, an academy award?

I am a psychologist and since the first time I saw one of his films I realizad he is a mental case needing to express himself through excessive ridiculous face and body contractions.

I’ve never thought Carrey was very funny and I think he just tries too hard to be.  And these comments he made show much misinformation and ignorance about the Catholic Church.

So typically Hollywood! Bah. These people need to educate themselves.

Jim Carey ends his tirade against the Church I love, to say, “U have my blessing.” No, Carey, I don’t want your blessing.  I’ll always settle for the blessing of a Catholic Priest or Bishop or Cardinal and the Pope.  No thanks, you keep your blessing!

Truth be T, Jim has taken the Hollywood oath to pleadge his allegance to it for his success.  Well he cannot serve two masters you will hate one and love the other. As for cowalker, you are ignorant to the facts regarding the church and politics The Federal Govt continues to reach its immoral claws into the faith and moral lives if its religious citizens where the govt claims that there is separation of church and state.  Our Beloved Bishops are heads of the Sovereign state of the Vatican, and have the right to fight for our legal rights on faith and moral issues and that is all they are doing. Please pray for them cause if they loose, we and especially future citizens, are literally doomed.

Go to Medjugorje Jim! -and to all the silly people - someone had to go to Lourdes and Fatima before they were approved!  Go To Medjugorje!

Jim Carrey is bipolar, which might explain some of the more incoherent tweets.  I also think they tend to have a love/hate relationship with religion (I am bipolar as well, though I have not experienced the extreme mania he reportedly has.)

This isn’t to say he shouldn’t be resonsible for what he says, just that it is possible it is affecting his judgment.  Of course, there are plenty who say the same sorts of things without any mental health issues, so who knows.

cowalker, “As a former Catholic myself, I deeply resent the interfering of the Catholic Church in my life through it’s intrusion into political matters.” It’s “intrusion” is for the moral good of society and sanctity of life. It never follows popularity du jour because the Church upholds what was handed from Jesus to the Apostles to His Church and is the same yesterday, today and tomorrow. Despite the purification it is presently going through, you should be proud to be Catholic who’s missions, charities, hospitals and schools have helped millions throughout the world. It’s teachings are solid.

On another note, I’m sorry Jim Carrey is speaking out of a shallow understanding of the Church. It’s easy to condemn, but I think he’s got a good heart if pointed in the right direction.

Wow, I was so mad when I saw Jim’s tweets in your article I immediately signed up for a twitter account so I could tell him off. After I went through the process and was ready to let him have it, I continued to read his tweets and saw that how sad his projected life seems to be. I decided to pray for him instead. God’s love is available to Jim too. Let’s pray that he be receptive to Him.

I am Catholic and I think Jim Carreys comments show much ignorance
But my comment is about the gay cabal theory being nonsense. WE have to
Face the truth in order to clean up the church. Please read the books Goodbye Good Men,
The Rite of Sodomy, and The Homosexual Network before you make ignorant
Comments yourself.

Nan posted on Saturday, Mar 2, 2013 1:12 AM (EST):
“Cowalker, the Church has the right to speak to morality . . . .” yada yada yada.

Uh yes, that’s what I said. It’s got the right. But why pretend that haranguing people about their immorality based on your particular religion, which they don’t share, is going to make them feel admiring, kindly and grateful to you?

L. posted on Saturday, Mar 2, 2013 9:39 PM (EST):
“[The Catholic Church’s ‘intrusion’ is for the moral good of society and sanctity of life. It never follows popularity du jour . . . .”

So why do Catholics pretend to be surprised that their church is being ridiculed? It’s not going for popularity, right?

How popular would it be if mosques in the U.S. organized to try to get laws passed to make it illegal for any woman, including non-Muslims, to go out in public without a hijab? It is considered immoral for a woman in many Muslim countries to go out with her face unveiled. Will you feel charitable toward U.S. Muslims who try to get this immoral behavior prohibited in the U.S.?

When a church starts meddling in affairs of law, it becomes a target for criticism, dislike, and, yes, hatred. And no, they don’t hate you for your freedom. They hate you for trying to interfere with THEIR freedom.

@cowalker: I am so very sorry that after all these years you still are in rebellion against the Catholic Church you were birn into. Iwill continue to pray that the cloud that engulfs you will lift and you will turn back to the Universal Church and it’s truth and way to salvation. God bless and guide you home.

The moron is neither funny nor an actor.  He is just a piece of ugly !@#$%.

Anything coming from Jim Carrey is not worth a comment nor has it ever been.

In a feeble attempt to revive his decomposing career—- Jim Carey has just tweeted a winning ‘resume’ to his Hollywood gods!!  As like many other megastar wannabes: at the expense of Catholic Christians and our religious beliefs!!...May the one and only REAL God, our Heavenly Father AND Creator have mercy on your soul!!

“If the world hates you, know that it hated me first.”
- Jesus

Oh Jim must be looking for a movie deal….. He’s looking for publicity ...... What away to get it….. Pretty low….Who did he write that million dollar check to, when he was poor?.....Poor Jim…..How sad…..

For some strange reason I don’t feel that I need Jim Carey’s blessing to ‘worship wherever’ I want.

The “Dictatorship of irrelevance” marches on…

A lot of interesting and informative comments here, some very good, but there is no need for the rude ones.  I agree, he needs our prayers, not our insults.  We just stoop to the same level when we refer to him as “moron”, “disturbing”, “ugly…”.  Let’s not fall into the cultural trap of “right back at ya”.  Yes, he’s been disrespectful, insulting.  So let’s show him a better way.  It just makes us look bad and opens us up to the same judgments.  Is this loving our neighbor as ourselves?  These kinds of comments will never bring anyone to the truth, let alone back to the church.

Ugh, how disgusting. I never cared for his acting anyway, so it won’t be hard to avoid him.

As a side note, 25 percent of the U.S. population identifies as Catholic, so his public hatred seems to be a bad business move…but then again, I wonder how many Catholics actually would refuse to support him after such terrible statements?

I believe he is trying to make light on some issues.The one about the new pope is trying to get people to lighten up about the leaving of Benedict and awaiting for a new pope.The one about the woman is a more srious one;there are some women who will stay with an abuser because she doesn’t want to feel alone-sad,but true.There are some catholics(who won’t admit to it) that they are afraid to go to confession,but will talk to god privately.Humor is a ‘hit or miss’ thing.There are catholics who do find his humor funny,either you do or don’t.

Jim Carrey was actually funny on “In Living Color” in the aged Star Trek skit…after that he has been humorless. Whatever problems he might have or have had, it’s P C. to cast blame and criticism on the Catholic Church. I was raised Baptist, and didn’t like anything to do with anything Catholic. But Jesus in the Blessed Sacrament touched my heart, and once I learned the history of things, I could see why the Catholic Church, having Christ as her founder, would be attacked and smeared and unpopular with society. I do feel sorry for Mr. Carrey and repeat what what Christ prayed: “Forgive them, Father, for they know not what they are doing.”  He and others need lots of prayers.

That Carrey disgusting clown can go to hell whenever he wishes to do so.

Jim Carrey is a has-been. Like many other self-righteous, publicity-hungry celebs,
Carrey attacks the Church via twitter, hoping that it’ll be a trending topic. Anyone
admiring him is in great danger.

I have never, ever considered Mr. Carrey funny, humorous or amusing (his presence in a movie or broadcast is a deal-breaker for me) and I find his anti-Catholic tweets reprehensible. Imagine if some other religions were subject to remarks such as his.

Funny, as a Catholic I don’t waste my time attacking other people’s religions - clearly Jim Carrey isn’t Catholic anymore, but dang, dude, move on. I have more respect for someone who asserts their beliefs rather than picking on other people’s beliefs. Every Catholic can’t follow around every priest, bishop, or cardinal to see what they’re doing every hour of the day, and it’s wrong to condemn all of them and all Catholics because some of them aren’t doing their job. I’d say Jim Carrey is the one being harsh here.

Tony,
Thanks for your comments. I like the “dang, dude,move on” part.
There’s a priest in our diocese that feels he must include in every homily some criticism of another denomination & he always ends with something like “and aren’t we glad that’s not the way the Catholic Church behaves?” He’s lost parishoners who’ve just had it with those depressing homilies & obviously, non-Catholic visitors are completely turned off & embarrassed.
Like you say, assert your own beliefs. Catholics don’t need to pick on others.

Kathleen,  you need to say something to that priest, and if that doesn’t end it, write to the bishop.  When he says those things he isn’t teaching the truth of the Catholic faith.

If you’re going to denigrate 2 billion people at least spell “hypocrisy” right.

Patti RCIA,
Folks have tried, but it doesn’t seem to help.Plus, the priest, at least when I’ve heard him, is just stating the practises or conflicting theology of the other denomination. But when he makes the comparison to our faith it & asks if we’re not glad Catholics don’t believe or do that, it becomes a turn off. I think he’s approaching retirement & it’s not my parish but if I visit there, perhaps there might be an opportunity to encourage him to just highlight our faith & leave the rest be.I think our faith can stand on its own.
Perhaps from his perspective he sees his homilies as a teaching opportunity as many folk here are little educated in the faith.Some older people have literacy issues, too.

I dare this comedian to make equivalent comments to a Muslim cleric!
Let´s see how “critical and brave”, he really is!

The has-been must be high on drugs.

Doesn’t everyone in Hollywood realize that eventually they are yesterday’s news. Jim’s hateful messages aren’t hip and funny, their just sad. Say a prayer for him.

It’s just the same old lack of catechesis, this time in a celebrity. How I wish people would take the time to inform themselves, and not take their cues on the church from the New York Times.

I had a boss who told me her class in catholic school (I guess middle or high) was told by the nun that babies who died without baptism went to limbo. She was so upset that God would do that that she later left the Church and became an Episcopalian. I told her that limbo was NEVER a dogma of the Church, but was only a theory by Aquinas. (Hope I got the. Right author). So sad it was taught as if it WAS already a dogma.

Learn to spell correctly Jim.

Jim Carrey certainly proves his intellectual prowress through his movies .. ” Dumb and Dumber ” is a good example. I wonder if there truly is a dividing line between the acting and the real man ?

I have a question ( I already know the answer ) but I want to see how many people are awake out there. Who,in specific terms, does Satan combat? I just need one name for the answer.
There wont be any prizes but at least I will know who is on the ball so to speak.

These Hollywood types… Once they go off script they show how empty and stupid they are. What’s the old saying about keeping one’s mouth shut and be thought a fool than open it and confirm it… or something to that effect.
The more we pay attention to these people the bigger their egos get, the worse it is for us. He may be funny, but I can honestly say his movies don’t make my life any better - or worse. Just shows how much we need him. Frankly, I don’t support these people if I can help it by watching their movies. How stupid must he be to insult a sizable portion of his potential audience.

Peter, Satan battles with Christ, Christ’s Mother, Mary (she who would “crush his head”), and anyone who is close to them. He has no need to tempt or to do battle with athiests, agnostics, lazy or lukewarm Christians. He may very well have those people in his pocket already.

Thank you for responding Michelle. I am so pleased. You are close. At first glance I guess my question has an obvious answer .... You note I wrote, 
    ” Who,in specific terms, does Satan combat? I just need one name for the answer. ”
    You are Confirmed I assume ... we become soldiers of Christ ie we take up the “sword” and fight Satan. Satan does not combat us,but he does tempt us to sin. Somehow over the years we seem to have lost the understand what Christ meant when he said ” The gates of Hell shall not prevail against His Church ” This means of course we as Catholics have to be out there fighting satan with prayers, good works etc. Christ was not meaning Satan would be combating us perse BUT Christ did mean WE SHOULD be combating satan  
  Who else has a sword in his hand ? It is St Michael the Archangel,the most important angel we know of. It was he who drove Lucifer and the other rebellious angels into Hell. St Michael is still God’s general.
  In the order of intercessors ( ie those in Heaven who intercede for us to Jesus Our Blessed Mother is 1st. St Joseph is 2nd and St.Michael is 3rd.
  No one combats God and of course Jesus is God. God could eliminate Satan and anyone else for that matter in a moment. Sure we all sin but sin is an offence against God rather than a combat.
  I am sorry Michelle but I seem to be typing more than I intended.
The answer I am looking for specifically is St Michael the Archangel.     
  Once again I thank you for your reply. May God bless you.

I would just like to say what G.K. Chesterton ,the great author and catholic convert, said so well. “When the people discovered Christianity they did not find it wanting. They found it difficult and therefore they did not want it” Pray for Jim Carrey

Peter, Interesting reply and don’t apologize for its length! As far as St. Michael the Archangel goes—-yes I am confirmed and I did choose three saints (although I would like to add a fourth, St. Therese)...St. Michael was listed first and “Michael” is how I was called at my confirmation. I was under the impression that in one sense the battle between St. Michael and the devil was done since Michael has cast the devil and his minions out of heaven. Yet each day I become morw aware of the necessity of Mass, confession, and prayer as the tools to personaly strengthen me and other Catholics. Thank you for the reminder that we are all soldiers of Christ. Fr. John Corapi, SOLT gave a wonderful talk about that at a conference I went to. How I wish Jim Carrey would be able to see all of the truth and beauty of the Catholic Church. I pray he does so before it is too late.
—

Michelle,your reply was very gracious. I appreciate that. I really like Fr Corapi’s talks. I pray for him every day, terrible thing what happened to him, Satan is so devious that even the seemingly best of human beings can succumb and fall through satan’s wiles. If it was not for Holy Confession I would doubt if many people could make to Heaven. As it is, Christ did say “few will find the narrow path”
  I can understand why some people would prefer to stick their head in the sand rather than ponder their salvation. But as we both know that act is totally pointless. Sooner or later they have to come up for air and the problems still confront them. Jim Carry is a person like that. He wants to ingratiate Hollywood to him ... I would doubt if a devout Catholic would last too long as an actor in Hollywood. The stench of anti-Christ sentiment would suffocate them. “Serve Christ or man” comes to mind. 

His first comment was dumb, the others were dumber.  “Former Catholics” all seem to think they have a handle on the Faith, but if they ever truly did have a handle on the faith, they would never choose to be “formers”.

Cowalker,

I am tired of people misinterpreting the contraceptive mandate. It basically says that any group that does anything outside their church is not religious. So a bible publisher is not religious. A religious order that makes jams and sells them is not religious. So the little sisters of the poor and religious orders with a healthcare ministry, have to shut down because they will not comply with the forced violation of their conscience and someone else defining their mission for them because the party of the poor and minorities says so.

So stop the spin.

The Roman Catholic Church has entered a period of grave darkness. How she emerges in the next few weeks will tell the direction she takes for the future; left or right. I am hoping all this has been a part of a grand scheme that Pope John left. Like most all, I was totally surprised when a hard nose conservative like Pope Benedict would even think of resigning. These are not the moves of an extremely conservative Pope or dedicated individual.

For this reason, I believe Pope Benedict’s premature resignation is linked to Pope John’s pre-ordained scheme for either bringing the church back to her roots, or is linked to the last part of the three secrets of Fatima. Pope John only shared the third secret with his closest of confidants, of which Pope Benedict was his closest.

If the church falls to the hands of an open minded person who believes she needs to modernize, we are lost as true Roman Catholics. The job of the Pope is to protect original doctrine, not change it to meet the needs of the ever changing people.

“One true Catholic believer is worth more than all trying to bend the church to what they believe.”

Remember, religion is an individual belief. We are all born free thinkers, and make our own choices. For those who believe, how we live our lives is not for our own reasons, be they filled with good intensions. But, by doctrine set forth… whether we like it or not.

The truth will be revealed to all one day when we pass from this life to the next. The choices are all our own in this life to where we will be after the passing into the realm of God.

The future path of the Catholic Church will soon be known… Whichever path the Catholic Church takes, a true Roman Catholic knows the path to God.

“While Hollywood demeans sex to a matter of assent and self pleasure, the Catholic Church teaches that sexuality is a beautiful gift from God and that sex can be a great source of holiness when it’s between a man and wife and open to the transmission of life. Far from denying sexuality, the Catholic Church celebrates it and seeks the greatest good from it. Acts of sex that don’t live up to that, separate ourselves from God and ourselves.”

Sorry. But that just doesn’t cut it. My wife and I are going on our fortieth year of marriage which has had its share of lovemaking. We have two wonderful children that we chose to have when we were best able to raise and support them. Carrey is right about the Church’s sexual hangups.

Often there are times to pray and this is one of those times. I never was a fan of this guy or even thought of his work as good, but that really doesn’t matter. What does matter is his soul and I figure that Jesus would like his soul, so as Christians it is our duty to say a prayer for this lost soul and pray that he finds the love that Jesus offers.

There are many that attack the Catholic Church and those people need love and guidance to let go of their hate and find the greatest give that Jesus taught as and that is his Love for all mankind.

Dear Bill S, so what are you sorry about? What doesn’t cut what? Your anecdotal life is not enough to support or deny the Church’s teaching on conjugal love. All you’ve told us is that you’ve had 40 years of lovemaking with your wife. How does that refute it? What sexual hangups are you talking about?

I was just commenting on “when it’s between a man and wife and open to the transmission of life”. I’ve used contraceptives my whole adult life except for the conception of my children. That was the only point I was trying to make.

Bill S,

I am willing to bet that this subject was not even discussed in your parish when you were growing up. You are not at fault, your instructors are.

Hi savvy. Good to hear from you again. Actually, I was taught about the Church’s stand on birth control in an all male Catholic high school. Our instructor was a brother in his mid twenties who answered all of our (supposedly) hypothetical questions about sex. I cringe now about how naive he was. I could not have a normal sex life and be faithful to the Church so I opted for the sex life. Even when I came back to the Church, I ignored its teachings about contraception. If the Church is going to allow NFP, it should allow other methods as well.

The key word in NFP is NATURAL. Anything else is not “natural” in the sense that there is no interference in the sex act. No pills, no abortifacients, no condoms, no nothing.
The last two postings are subtle examples of the rebellion against church teachings by its own members that has caused so much confusion. “Cafeteria” catholicism is a bane against Christ and his Church. We individually justify our actions as true “Modernists”. If it feels good…
The real question is what does it mean to be Catholic. Do we just pick and choose what we like or are we real members of the Church. Following in her teachings, doing what St. Paul said about not allowing heretical ideas to lead her astray?
This rabid individualism among the members in the Protestant world has caused a fracturing that continues down to the last person. Look at all the fractious churches founded daily by someone who disagrees with the placement of a comma or a period in this or that Bible reading. 38,000+ at last count. Do we want the same thing to happen to our Church?
This picking and choosing among uninformed egotistical members of the Church will lead to splits along the same way. The Church has its Dogma, Tradition and Magisterium to speak the Truth of Christ, who founded the Church. Not poorly formed priests, lay people. In the end, as Pilate asked, “What is Truth?” What’s your answer?

“The Church has its Dogma, Tradition and Magisterium to speak the Truth of Christ, who founded the Church. Not poorly formed priests, lay people.”

Your comments provide the reasons why reasonable people must leave the Catholic Church and not look back. In a way, you could say that the dogmatic authoritarians hijacked the church hundreds of years ago and that is why we have Protestantism and a lot of ex and non practicing Catholics. I guess the only way to look at it is to let Catholics have their own fantasy world and neither bother them nor listen to them.

What are you doing on this site? What positive contributions are you making to these discussions? So we should all leave the Church and let it sink into oblivion. That’s what you seem to be saying. It’s not about reason, but about FAITH.
Reason without faith leads to nihilism and dissolution, as we can see every day as the society continues to tear itself apart. You sir are not Catholic in the traditional sense, but something else. You pick on the most innocent part of my comment, but do not address my most cogent points. You say “reasonable” people should leave the Church. I think luke-warm or non-Catholics should leave the Church.
The Dogma, Tradition and shepherd-ship of the Magisterium under the guidance of the Holy Ghost has allowed the Church to survive and thrive for over two thousand years. If there is a real problem with the Church it is that for the last 60 years it has walked away from it’s traditions and especially it liturgy to accomodate more and more ideas you aspire to. Until it returns to its traditions, it will continue to have less and less influence on our society. And that, I’m sure, will make you very happy.

Is this one of your more cogent points?

“The real question is what does it mean to be Catholic. Do we just pick and choose what we like or are we real members of the Church. Following in her teachings, doing what St. Paul said about not allowing heretical ideas to lead her astray?”

Maybe I want to be Catholic but people like you have hijacked the Church by calling people who dissent “heretics”.  The Church really has to get its act together. Maybe the new Pope will be a legitimate reformer and not just more of the same.

Bill, there are Catholics who believe in loyal dissent.  Asking questions doesn’t make one a heretic.  Some of the most fervent, loyal Catholics I know encourage questions because questioning strengthens faith.  But if you dislike being called a heretic for raising your hand, the NCR probably isn’t the place for you.

“But if you dislike being called a heretic for raising your hand, the NCR probably isn’t the place for you.”

No. I’m good. No one has called me a heretic.

I guess I would have to classify myself as an unrepentant sinner since I do not structure my whole life around Catholic teaching. I have been the responsible male in an abortion. I have practiced family planning in ways that the Church considers unnatural. I wouldn’t be opposed to my gay son marrying. I plan to take my own life if I find myself terminally ill and a burden to my children, etc.  I don’t stay up nights worrying about either going to heaven or avoiding hell.

Bill S,

I am sorry to say, this, but sin has hardened your heart, to the extent that you are no longer open to a change of heart or even dialogue. If you go to church, please do not receive communion. It will only harden your heart even more, like it did to Judas, when he received the Eucharist in a state of unrepentant sin. There are two kinds of people, saints who know they are sinners, and sinners who think they are saints.

Savvy,

I’m not either a saint who thinks he’s a sinner or a sinner thinks he’s a saint. I know I’m not perfect and that’s why I can tolerate other imperfect people. I like to banter with people who refuse to tolerate the words and deeds of these imperfect people as if they and their Church can do or say no wrong. Sin has not hardened me. It has made me more forgiving of the faults of other sinners.

Bill, I don’t understand where you’re coming from. If you’re angry that the church has been hijacked by anybody you obviously don’t think the church is right for you. Therefore why don’t you in good conscience move to another church that better suits you - say, the Episcopalians, which is where many “Catholics” end up. Catholic light.
As the great Chesterton said:

“Take away the supernatural, and what remains is the unnatural.”

Bonus:

“Truth, of course, must of necessity be stranger than fiction, for we have made fiction to suit ourselves.”

“Christianity has not been tried and found wanting; it has been found difficult and left untried.”

“why don’t you in good conscience move to another church that better suits you - say, the Episcopalians, which is where many “Catholics” end up. Catholic light.”

I don’t really want to leave the Catholic Church. I go to church for the sense of community and because my wife goes.

“Take away the supernatural, and what remains is the unnatural.”

I don’t get that pompous statement. Some would say that all there is the natural.

Migo,

Hijacked stems from misguided views on Vatican 2.  Anybody can develop a charism, but not everybody succeeds in bringing it to life. That is the work of the Holy Spirit. There are men and women who have brought their vision to life, and there are others who do not make it. Blaming someone else, for the failure to do so, is not wise. What’s needed is introspection. As my spiritual director told me, if God wants you to be somewhere nothing on earth, will stop you and if God does not, nothing on earth will get you in.

“If you’re angry that the church has been hijacked by anybody you obviously don’t think the church is right for you. Therefore why don’t you in good conscience move to another church that better suits you - say, the Episcopalians, which is where many ‘Catholics’ end up. Catholic light.”  Migo, you do realize that you’re stuck with us for eternity, right?  Nothing can make me “not Catholic.”  I was baptized and confirmed in the Faith.  Not even ex-communication could change that.  Instead of suggesting that your brothers and sisters leave the welcoming arms of Christ, why not try to share that welcoming spirit with them? 

Grace,

I too am one of those Catholics who they are stuck with. My wife and just about all of my friends and relatives are Catholic. If the Catholic Church consisted of parishes with no hierarchy, that would suit me just fine. My whole life could revolve around my parish where everyone is good to one another. I suppose that what I am describing might be a typical Protestant congregation. If hate to leave everyone at my parish and go elsewhere.

Grace, Bill, I was merely suggesting we take a more educated effort in discussions like these. We seem to gripe about the externals of our faith with no understanding the why’s and the wherefores of the dogmas.
The modernist point of view sees things without a spiritual side - i.e. man/ego driven. In a sense, if one can’t see the answers to questions from a ‘practical’ or ‘realistic’ or if you will ‘scientific’ point of view then it must not be valid. That is what Chesterton was arguing against. This is how we disobey God’s commandments and begin to accept modernist thoughts like abortion, euthanasia, gay “marriage”, etc.
One of my pet peeves is that the Church stopped catechizing and teaching these basics of our faith. I grew up in the 50’s with Franciscan nuns in grammar school. With the old Baltimore catechism the one nun managed to teach all 57 of us in her class the basics of our Faith that to this day I thank God for.
We now have Catholics who don’t believe in the real presence, who believe in divorce, contraception, etc. These people are not true Catholics in the sense that they don’t believe or practice what their faith tells them to do. Catholicism is not a democracy. Either you’re Catholic or not. Therefore the honest thing to do is what people do all the time when they lose their faith. Move to another Church or found their own Church. Out of courtesy to the other members who don’t agree with appostatic ideas one should leave. Like a bad apple…
If one’s faith is lukewarm and it’s important to you, then why not delve further and deeper into it. Try to learn as much as you can. It will only strengthen your faith. There is so much rich literature from the past 2000 years that can enlighten and elevate one to a deeper understanding of their faith.
As far as the local hierarchy goes, you would have the same problems the protestant denominations have. That is, it becomes more and more democratic, and more and more fractured. Survival of the strongest
‘cause that’s who would win every argument. Plus, on the dogmatic side, the hierarchy was set up that way by Jesus. So if you don’t agree with it, you’re not following Jesus’ directive - you’re not being Catholic.

Hollywood, these guys are known for fighting, spliting, abusing drugs, paying up to clean their mess, destroying, ill-teaching, spreading the faith of the devil and rellying on people’s ignorance to make money. Jim is only manifesting! They know the Church is about to finally weather the storm and they just do not want it. They have opted to have their own “catholic” spread their teaching amongst Christ’s flock to cause fighting, splitting, frustration, abuses and destruction in the name of leading mordernity.

“They have opted to have their own “catholic” spread their teaching amongst Christ’s flock to cause fighting, splitting, frustration, abuses and destruction in the name of leading mordernity.”

So, that’s the way you view the modern world?  That’s sad.

As dumb and unreasonable as he sounds, as Catholic we have to pray for his conversion.  God is known to work in mysterious way i.e St Paul as an example.

Migo, I appreciate that.  It’s just the assumption that underscores the claim that’s problematic—namely, that those who disagree with the Church regarding same-sex marriage, for example, simply haven’t been properly catechized.  I’m very familiar with the Baltimore Catechism as well as more current American versions, and yet I still find the Church’s teachings on homosexuality to be unacceptable.  At the very least, I suppose I could offer my own wish that those who accept the RCC’s position on homosexuality would spend meaningful time with Catholics from groups like (gasp) Equally Blessed, Fortunate Families, or Call to Action, entering into encounters with these folks with truly open minds (i.e. refraining from the assumption that they’re headed to hell or inherently worthy of ex-communication).  You write, “Catholicism is not a democracy. Either you’re Catholic or not.”  One is Catholic because one is baptized in the faith.  My family has been Catholic since at least the 13th-century (when records were first kept in their Italian villages).  Whether I question the Church or not, I assure you, I’m Catholic.  And thanks to the baptismal waters, I always will be.  I’m genuinely sorry if that seems like some kind of oxymoron to you.  I can’t understand the resistance to the notion of loyal dissent.  If no questioning occurs, how are we to distinguish between faith and indoctrination? 

Grrr…  The NCR’s “spam filter” is one of the most annoying aspects of this site.  It’s possible that some version of this comment will post at some point in the future but I’m tired of waiting for it to show up.  Migo, I appreciate what you’ve said.  The problem is with the assumption that underscores the claim: people who reject the Church’s teaching regarding same-sex marriage must not have been properly catechized.  On the contrary, I’m well-versed in the Baltimore Catechism as well as more current American forms of the catechism.  And yet I still reject the Church’s view of homosexuality.  You write, “Catholicism is not a democracy. Either you’re Catholic or not.”  One is Catholic by virtue of one’s baptism.  My entire family is Catholic and has been since at least the 13th-century (when records were first kept in their small Italian villages).  Whether you want to think of me as such or not, I assure you, I am Catholic.  And I also ask questions.  I’m truly sorry if you think of this as some kind of oxymoron.  I don’t understand the wholesale rejection of a concept like loyal dissent.  Without questioning, how is one to tell the difference between faith and indoctrination?

Grace,

Loyal dissent, is admitting that you do not understand, but are open to doing so. Arrogant dissent is not even trying, because of pride.  As for people being educated in the faith and rejecting it, it’s nothing new, the people who knew Jesus personally still rejected him.  He let them walk away. He never said, come back “i will change my views”

Sadly, that’s not at all what loyal dissent is.  As the Second Vatican Council stated: “In the depths of his conscience, man deflects a law which he does not impose upon himself, but which holds him to obedience.  Always summoning him to love good and avoid evil, the voice of conscience can when necessary speak to his heart more specifically: do this, shun that.  For man has in his heart a law written by God.  To obey it is the very dignity of man; according to it he will be judged.  Conscience is the most secret core and sanctuary of man.  There he is alone with God, whose voice echoes in his depths.”  Additionally, Vatican II tells us that people “must not be forced to act contrary to their conscience, especially in religious matters.”  I say again, then, that nothing can supersede one’s own informed conscience.  Ultimately, all I can tell you is that you’re stuck with Bill S., me, and others like us—stuck here and throughout eternity.  I stand with those who question—the loyal Catholics who lived during the Inquisition and knew that what the Church was doing to faithful Jews was immoral.  Those were good Catholics—perhaps the best Catholics.  If the Church’s own teachings don’t persuade you to accept the supremacy of one’s conscience or recognize the eternal bond you and I share with one another by virtue of the baptismal waters, I’m not sure why others are great Catholics while I’m the sinner.

Migo, Bill emailed me a response to what you said yesterday.

“We now have Catholics who don’t believe in the real presence, who believe in divorce, contraception, etc. These people are not true Catholics in the sense that they don’t believe or practice what their faith tells them to do. Catholicism is not a democracy. Either you’re Catholic or not. Therefore the honest thing to do is what people do all the time when they lose their faith. Move to another Church or found their own Church. Out of courtesy to the other members who don’t agree with appostatic ideas one should leave.”

Migo, I don’t dissent in my own church.  My wife is a devout Catholic and I do everything with her despite my own personal feelings about the Church.  I enjoy the discussions with well informed Catholics online, but I would be crazy to have the same with family and friends.  No way!

I’m sorry I overdid it yesterday.  I was on my iPhone texting and riding an exercise bike.  It made the time go by faster but I ended up being blocked by another blogger and now I can’t get onto any NCR blogs until I am reinstated which they told me they will have to run by the blogger to get her OK.

Who would look to the star of such cinema classics as Dum & Dummer[I know that I spelled Dumb wrong] and Ace Ventura as an authority on any theological question? This is,of course a rhetorical question.

Grace,

Let me give you an example to help you understand the church’s teachings on homosexuality. I have a mild form of Aspergers syndrome. Now, it’s not chosen, but nobody knows for sure, what causes it. There are speculations, but nothing close to a concrete set. I do not define my whole existence by Aspergers like the LGBT community does. I also do not think this excuses me from thinking my actions have no consequences because, I was born this way. Aspergers is something, I have, it’s not who I am. This is how the church sees gay people.

Some things about me have changed by therapy, but some have not. So in both cases, it’s not immutable like race, even if some traits exist.

Bill writes,

“you could say that the dogmatic authoritarians hijacked the church hundreds of years ago and that is why we have Protestantism”

This is of course, the extremist or better yet revisionist view presented our children today. It is a myopic view which attempts to suggest the beginnings of “Protestantism” was a sort of free-spirited liberating movement. 

In fact the beginnings of this great disobedience was not based on a “reforming” cleaning of house or better doctrinal definitions or greater love of God or…, 

it was a power-play among principalities, often among nations. It was based on greed not love. Nationalism, materialism, separatism, all rolled into one. As Protestantism bared it’s head in the western sphere of Christendom, reform of the Church had already begun. With many good men of the Church being lost during the Black Death of Europe, holy men, teachers and preachers, simple men of charity, those who took care of the dead and dying confusion of thought and instruction began to slip in.

The Church already saw the need long before Luther and his self-absorbing nature. But least we forget Catholicism was fighting an even greater foe on it’s southern boarder, Mohammedism. One wonders if Ridley Scott will ever up his game and finally produce a historically accurate movie, say one on the miracle of Lepanto?, instead of one more fictional account of Christianity.

Sadly, and predictably, Protestantism has not drawn out greater clarity of faith. Adherents and potential converts of this heresy, (oh yes the Church still classifies it a heresy) have only achieved greater division, argumentation and doubt. The man in the street desires to be united to Christ’s rightful authority in the world most fully and completely, he will not find what he looks for under the Protesting umbrella of disunity.

Back to Carrey  

Carrey’s twitter comments merely demonstrate the ignorance of our time. The dumbing down (“Dumb and Dumber”)of youth by our secular institutions and news media. His babbling represent the self-hating nature of new-agers who often belittle organized religion claiming they are no longer religionists but spiritualists. Fun how God does not call us to be spiritual “spirits” but to be more holy.

Pray for Carrey a lost soul. He is as confused and angry as his comedic movie characters often are.

Grace,

stuck with you because you are a baptized person? Well sort of. 

If you mean to say you are joined to the Church (meaning united to the rest of us Catholics) through your baptism well yes then we are, “stuck with you” or to you because the Church is,... ONE. And interestingly enough this is the exact situation or status most but not all our Protestant brethren find themselves in. Sadly when the Church proclaims herself as Church, the only Church Christ left us, our separated brethren misunderstand and feel abandoned or worse slighted. 

But ultimately they[baptized Protestants] are persons not in, full communion with the Church of Jesus Christ (the Catholic Church) because they have rejected the call to unity of teaching and belief, which is at the core of our Catholicity of Christian faith. 

Catholic from the Gk, cata and holos meaning according to the whole.

Therefore, I may be stuck with you as a Catholic who has been properly baptized and properly initialized into the membership of the One Christian Church but I am never stuck with your personal opinions or desires (mislabeled as “loyal dissent” elsewhere) of how you feel the Church should reshape doctrine or dogma. 

“Rome has spoken; the case is closed” St Augustine on the Pelagianism heresy. 

If your dissent/disobedience of thought is serious enough you have in fact already excommunicated yourself and it would be wiser for you to abstain from the sacraments. This of course is something akin to a Protestant existence and in a way what Migo has already suggested.

Bill S writes,
“dogmatic authoritarians hijacked Church ...that is why we have Protestantism”

This is of course, the extremist or better yet revisionist view presented our children today. It is a myopic view which attempts to suggest the beginnings of “Protestantism” was a sort of free-spirited liberating movement. 

In fact the beginnings of this great disobedience was not based on a “reforming” cleaning of house or better doctrinal definitions or greater love of God or…, 

it was a power-play among principalities, often among nations. It was based on greed not love. Nationalism, materialism, separatism, all rolled into one. As Protestantism bared it’s head in the western sphere of Christendom, reform of the Church had already begun. With many good men of the Church being lost during the Black Death of Europe, holy men, teachers and preachers, simple men of charity, those who took care of the dead and dying confusion of thought and instruction began to slip in.

The Church already saw the need long before Luther and his self-absorbing nature. But least we forget Catholicism was fighting an even greater foe on it’s southern boarder, Mohammedism. One wonders if Ridley Scott will ever up his game and finally produce a historically accurate movie, say one on the miracle of Lepanto?, instead of one more fictional account of Christianity.

Sadly, predictably, Protestantism has not drawn out greater clarity of faith. Adherents and potential converts of heresy, (oh yes the Church still classifies it a heresy) have only achieved greater division, argumentation and doubt. The man in the street desires to be united to Christ’s rightful authority in the world most fully and completely, he will not find what he looks for under the Protesting umbrella of disunity.

Back to Carrey  

Carrey’s twitter comments merely demonstrate the ignorance of our time. The dumbing down (“Dumb and Dumber”)of youth by our secular institutions and news media. His babbling represent the self-hating nature of new-agers who often belittle organized religion claiming they are no longer religionists but spiritualists. Funny how God does not call us to be spiritual “spirits” but to be more holy.

Pray for Carrey a lost soul. He is as confused and angry as his comedic movie characters often are.

“If your dissent/disobedience of thought is serious enough you have in fact already excommunicated yourself and it would be wiser for you to abstain from the sacraments.”

No person or institution is above questioning and dissent.

“No person or institution is above questioning and dissent.”

Yes, this is right, but it’s dishonest to profess something, if you do not intend to follow it esp, if it’s something as serious as an oath or a vow before God.

I have no idea if this will actually post—several of my responses to posts in the past few days haven’t.  Here goes…  Sadly, that is not at all what loyal dissent is.  As the Second Vatican Council states, “In the depths of his conscience, many deflects a law which he does not impose upon himself, but which holds him to obedience.  Always summoning him to love good and avoid evil, the voice of conscience can when necessary speak to his heart more specifically: do this, shun that.  For man has in his heart a law written by God.  To obey it is the very dignity of man; according to it he will be judged.  Conscience is the most secret core and sanctuary of man.  There he is alone with God, whose voice echoes in his depths.”  Vatican II also proclaims that people “must not be forced to act contrary to their own conscience, especially in religious matters.”  As I stated earlier, nothing can supersede one’s informed conscience.  There were good Catholics who knew as the Church conducted the Inquisition that its actions were immoral—they were still loyal although they rightfully questioned because God prompted their consciences to do so.  If you cannot accept the Church’s own teachings on conscience or recognize the bond that you and I share for all eternity thanks to the baptismal waters, I’m not sure why you’re a good Catholic while I’m the sinner.

“Yes, this is right, but it’s dishonest to profess something, if you do not intend to follow it esp, if it’s something as serious as an oath or a vow before God.”

When you make an oath or vow to God before you realize that there is no God, you might have to break it when you do find out. Not always. Eg. I still honor my marriage vows. But if I had become a priest, I would have to break those vows in order to be honest with myself and others.

Bill S,

The Church is not just some other institution, it contains the supernatural and perhaps your lack of understanding of the G.K Chesterton’s quote “lack of supernatural, leads to something unnatural”. If you believe the Church to be the mystical body of our God, instituted by the second person of the Holy Trinity then you begin to understand why nonconformity is doctrine developed by dissenters/protesters who are in truth separatists and can never reform something they leave behind. Oh yes and we can leave something by what we choose to call loyal dissent.
Now to question the Church is not off limits and the teaching authority of the Church is always open to questions which should imply you have not formed your dissent ummm nonconformity yet.  Nonconformity was formalized amongst radical “reformers” of the English reformation period, these were anything but “loyal” dissenters of Protestant hierarchy. Puritans and Presbyterians are examples of dissenters r-umm nonconformists and that have in a nutshell lead to geat disunity amongst their faithful. Bill here is the key, to mirror or reflect most fully the Holy Trinity we confess as believers and first Christians, the Church is one. You know, from the early credo “I believe in One, Holy Catholic Church…”  In other words, and perhaps even more profound, Catholics take the words of Jesus most seriously when John writes, “that they[Christ’s Church] be one as you[the Father] and I[Jesus] are one, so the world will know”! John 17:21 And so, dissent from God’s rightful authority, the epískopos of the Church on matters of dogma is never good and just. p.s. I had another reply for you yesterday but it hasn’t posted yet keep an eye out.

Haven’t watched any movies of his for a while. Now I have a better reason to avoid them in the future.

Thinker,

The guy thinks there is no God, but still refuses to leave the church.  The best thing is to ignore him. It’s been 2,000 years and these people are surprised, the Catholic church is Catholic.

Wow, Thinker. That was quite a reply.

What does G.K Chesterton mean when he says “lack of supernatural, leads to something unnatural”?

Unlike fellow atheists and Darwinists, I believe in an intelligent design of the universe which established all of the physical constants, laws of nature and living matter.  This is the closest I can come to the concept if God and falls far short of your concept of the Holy Trinity. That is just a theological concept with no real evidence to support it.

“nonconformity is doctrine developed by dissenters/protesters who are in truth separatists and can never reform something they leave behind.”

“And so, dissent from God’s rightful authority, the epískopos of the Church on matters of dogma is never good and just.”

So that pretty much insulates the Church from any serious reform.

Bill, you are living in “Whatifsville”. “If I were a priest…” You’re not and you don’t know how you would behave if you were. You’re projecting as IF you were. I suggest you go back to the Church documents to more fully inform yourself about the dogmas and why they’re there. Many books are available, especially from converted Protestants who don’t have an axe to grind regarding the Church. This is all a bore. Blather. So now we know - you don’t believe in God.
To all you dissenters who like to sow doubt among us, please, please stop it. All you’re dissenting against has been answered in spades in the past. There is nothing new except that modern day dissenters think they’re smarter than those boobs in the past.
Grace, and Bill S, you’re all infected by Modernism. The world revolves around you - your opinion is the most important thing there is. It’s the way the world should be. This is a heresy that was condemned by five Popes before VII stopped defending it. The Church is the fount of knowledge by virtue of Christs founding it. It cannot err.
Men can err, but the church, no. You’re suggesting the Church change it’s teachings because you think it should. Well, isn’t that the height of arrogance. Very cheeky. This is what the Protestant churches do all the time now, someone brings up a new idea - let’s say gay marriage - and it’s voted on. It passes and bingo, it becomes part of the belief system of that Church. Well, based on what authority? Based on which biblical passage (Sola Scriptura?) It’s why they are slowly dying. They have dissenters like yourselves who don’t have the humility or the knowledge to keep their opinions to themselves. It’s why I say this is really not the format for this give and take especially since we started with Dum and Dummers dumb statements.
Modernism has led to sterility. Abortion, gays, gay marriage, euthanasia all the love bugs of the liberal mentality lead to a dead end. You can’t build on that, there is no future.
I want to thank Thinker for his very cogent, well presented comments in this discourse.

Bill S,

The church believes in reform, just not the kind you have in mind. Christianity is about changing people, not institutions. You can’t change the world, unless you first change yourself.

“The guy thinks there is no God, but still refuses to leave the church.  The best thing is to ignore him. It’s been 2,000 years and these people are surprised, the Catholic church is Catholic.”

Savvy. I still see the Catholic Church as a force for good in the world. Not believing in God has not led me to any better alternatives.

Bill S,

You are being unrealistic if you want the church to stop believing in God or in Jesus Christ. It ain’t gonna happen pal.

Grace,

It’s fair to say that the groups you mention have not been properly catechized. Their arguments are political. You also cannot convince people who do not want to be convinced.

BTW, nobody hear said, that they were going to hell or anything like that. This is the typical “poor oppressed me. card, played by liberals, whenever you disagree with them.”

“Additionally, Vatican II tells us that people “must not be forced to act contrary to their conscience, especially in religious matters.” “

The Catechism, paragraph 2039: “Personal conscience and reason should not be set in opposition to the moral law or the Magisterium of the Church.

The question is What is Informed Conscience?

Vatican II states that, in forming their consciences “the faithful must pay careful attention to the sacred and certain teaching of the Church. For the Catholic Church is, by the will of Christ, the teacher of truth,

“the loyal Catholics who lived during the Inquisition and knew that what the Church was doing to faithful Jews was immoral.”

This is a false analogy. Murder is not a sacrament, Marriage is. Murder is not sacred. Sex is. Please learn some theology, before you lecture others.

Nobody says, you are a great sinner. We are all sinners. It’s more like you are ignorant and stubborn.

I do not know what is wrong with NCR, since posts are not showing up. To the last person who wrote this,

In fact the beginnings of this great disobedience was not based on a"reforming” cleaning of house or better doctrinal definitions or greater love of God or…”

I am in partial disagreement here. Luther was not a modernist. What he meant by reform was a return to the roots. He did not accomplish this fully, since the reformers soon started fighting among themselves, over who had the right interpretation of scripture. This continues till this day.

Luther was right to oppose the corruption of the church, but that was the catalyst, not the cause, the major question was How are we saved? Justification has still not been resolved today.

The secular media does not understand theology, they need to stop lecturing others.

“Posted by savvy on Monday, Mar 18, 2013 11:00 AM (EDT):
Bill S,
You are being unrealistic if you want the church to stop believing in God or in Jesus Christ. It ain’t gonna happen pal.”

Savvy,
I would never expect that. I was trying to say that even though I am not a believer I see the Catholic Church as having been an important positive force in our history and as a necessary part of our future. So how the Church can be reformed is important to me in that it affects more than just Catholics.

Bill,

I understand your claims, but ultimately it’s the Holy Spirit that is in change not you or me, even if you reject this.

For example, anybody can develop a charism, in the church, but not everybody can bring it to life. This is the work of God. I am tired of the Catholics who do not get their own way, of blaming everybody else and engaging in self-pity.  As my spiritual director said, is that if God wants you to be somewhere, nothing on earth will stop you, and if God does not nothing on earth will get you in.

Savvy,
It is obvious that being a Catholic fulfills a need in you to live a well ordered and disciplined life. I wouldn’t want to take that away from you. You are a gifted defender of the faith. I just don’t like when Catholics say that non-Catholics and nonparticipating Catholics have to live by their rules.

tried posting this reply Sunday made some edits

Bill S writes,
“dogmatic-authoritarians-hijacked-the-church ...hence-why-we-have-Protestantism”——This is of course, the extremist or better yet revisionist view presented our children today. It is a myopic view which attempts to suggest the beginnings of “Protestantism” was a sort of free-spirited liberating movement. In fact the beginnings of this great disobedience was not based on a “reforming” cleaning of house or better doctrinal definitions or greater love of God or, it was a power-play among principalities, often among nations. It was based on greed not love. Nationalism, materialism, separatism, all rolled into one. As Protestantism bared it’s head in the western sphere of Christendom, reform of the Church had already begun. With many good men of the Church being lost during the Black Death of Europe, holy men, teachers and preachers, simple men of charity, those who took care of the dead and dying confusion of thought and instruction began to slip in.——The Church already saw the need long before Luther and his self-absorbing nature. But least we forget Catholicism was fighting an even greater foe on it’s southern boarder, Mohammedism. One wonders if Ridley Scott will ever up his game and finally produce a historically accurate movie, say one on the miracle of Lepanto?, instead of one more fictional account of Christianity.——Sadly, predictably, Protestantism has not drawn out greater clarity of faith. Adherents and potential converts of this heresy, (oh yes the Church still classifies it a heresy) have only achieved greater division, argumentation and doubt. The man in the street desires to be united to Christ’s rightful authority in the world most fully and completely, he will not find what he looks for under the Protesting umbrella of disunity.——Carrey’s twitter comments merely demonstrate the ignorance of our time. The dumbing down (“Dumb and Dumber”)of youth by our secular institutions and news media. His babbling represent the self-hating nature of new-agers who often belittle organized religion claiming they are no longer religionists but spiritualists. Funny how God does not call us to be spiritual “spirits” but to be more holy.  Pray for Carrey a lost soul. He is as confused and angry as his comedic movie characters often are.

Well, this Catholic as small as I am, will not be buying, renting or even borrowing any of his movies. I’ll pray for him though and all those celebrities like “Madonna” and Rosie O’Donnell that hate the Catholic Church because they don’t bother to truly find out what we stand for. They have been blinded by money and stuff. If they were truly happy and at peace would they be so hateful and hypocritical? Madonna criticizes the Catholic Church and then kisses two women on TV just to get more attention. Can she truly say she is a good role model to her child? I guess she/they would because that is how warped their souls and hearts are. God help me pray with a sincere heart, for these people that You love even though they persecute You.

“I’ll pray for him though and all those celebrities like “Madonna” and Rosie O’Donnell that hate the Catholic Church because they don’t bother to truly find out what we stand for.”

All they need to know is the Catholic Church’s opposition to gay marriage to form a judgement. What more would you like them to know?  Are they misunderstanding the Church’s position on the matter and its description of homosexuality as “disordered” and contraception as “intrinsically evil”?

Bill S writes,
“dogmatic-authoritarians-hijacked-the-church…that-is-why-we-have-Protestantism”

Part I: This is of course, the extremist or better revisionist view presented our children today. It is a myopic view which attempts to suggest the beginnings of “Protestantism” was a sort of free-spirited liberating movement. In fact the beginnings of this great disobedience was not based on a “reforming” cleaning of house or better doctrinal definitions or greater love of God or, it was a power-play among principalities, often among nations. It was based on greed not love. Nationalism, materialism, separatism, all rolled into one. As Protestantism bared it’s confusion in Western Christendom, reform of the Church had already begun. With the loss of many good men of the Church during the Black Death, holy men, teachers, preachers, simple men of charity, those who took care of the dead and dying the Church was vulnerable to the confusion of thought and instruction that began to slip in.

“As Protestantism bared it’s confusion in Western Christendom, reform of the Church had already begun.”

Too little. Too late. There are many good Christians in our country today that are not Catholic. Regardless of the impetus behind it, the Reformation is an essential part of what this country is all about. Heresy or not, it was a long overdue correction to corruption.

Bill S,

I never said, you have to live by our rules. If they bother you to no extent it’s your problem, not ours. I am not bothered if others disagree with what I do.

“Are they misunderstanding the Church’s position on the matter and its description of homosexuality as “disordered” and contraception as “intrinsically evil”?”

So what? Do they have a new commandment that says, “thou shall bow down to the sexual revolution.”

Savvy,
It’s just human nature to want to feel accepted for who we are and not be judged by people who claim that they have a monopoly on the truth. When people say that they are obeying God and that you are not, you want to question that accusation.  You want to ask them what makes them think there even is a God and, if there is, who are they to think they know and do his will and that you don’t. The place to find out what others think about it is on blogs like this.

Bill S,

Your questions are valid. The thing is the church does not see human sexuality as separate from social justice, it’s part of the vision of the human person. Those cherry-picking the Catechism, might want to read it in full.

As for God, the question of obeying God, does not pertain to you, since you have made your beliefs clear, but to other Catholics who do also use God as an excuse.

“As for God, the question of obeying God, does not pertain to you, since you have made your beliefs clear, but to other Catholics who do also use God as an excuse.”

Thank you for your open-mindedness about me not having to obey God. I’ve been trying to get that point across to others to no avail.

Bill S,

You are the one who claimed to be Catholic, and posed as one. People just took you for your word.

Well, in a matter of speaking, I am. My life revolves around my parish and everyone around me appears to be a firm believer, especially my wife. I can’t have these discussions with friends and family. They would try to have me exorcized.

Bill S,

If you cannot stand up for your principles, then there is not point in lecturing others on theirs.

We’re not talking principles, Savvy. We are discussing our beliefs. And I am not lecturing you or anyone else.

“you don’t make your house look better by burning down your neighbors”,
we could all use a dose of human kindness, it is by forgiving and granting mercy that we love each other as we love ourselves. I know who I am, I won’t let someone else define me. when those who would condemn my church realize no one is listening they might take time to search their hearts and discover who they are, and if they love that person as they should. As God loves them.
When I work on my sins I am given great freedom, the “skunk” in the confessional is there as Christ’s advocate, his emissary. I enjoy being with him, no matter his flaws.

Bill S,
Just because you can type and put together a sentence does not qualify you to be a theologian. You wrap your philosophy around your shallow feelings about things.
You started this discussion by bragging about your 40 years of conjugal sexual pleasure. What a way to get off on a serious discussion. We’ve found out a lot about you. You’re Italian (so am I, so what?); you’re married 40 years, you have a gay son AND you don’t believe in God. I don’t believe anyone else has talked so much about themselves on a personal level as you have. You have some ego. Frankly, I speak for myself here, I’m sick of talking about sex. All kinds. I’m old enough to remember when the world revolved around really serious problems. Here we are discussing the narcicism of the worst kind. A dead end in and of itself.
I pray that you find the peace of mind and heart that so troubles you. I don’t think you’ll find it in Godlessness.

Bill S, re:reformation
Part 2: The Church already saw the need long before Luther and his self-absorbing nature. But least we forget Catholicism was fighting an even greater foe on it’s southern boarder, Mohammedism. One wonders if Ridley Scott will ever up his game and finally produce a historically accurate movie, say one on the miracle of Lepanto?, instead of one more fictional account of Christianity. Sadly, predictably, Protestantism has not drawn out greater clarity of faith. Adherents and potential converts of this heresy, (oh yes the Church still classifies it a heresy) have only achieved greater division, argumentation and doubt. The man in the street desires to be united to Christ’s rightful authority in the world most fully and completely, he will not find what he looks for under the Protesting umbrella of disunity. Carrey’s twitter comments merely demonstrate the ignorance of our time. The dumbing down (“Dumb and Dumber”)of youth by our secular institutions and news media. His babbling represent the self-hating nature of new-agers who often belittle organized religion claiming they are no longer religionists but spiritualists. Funny how God does not call us to be spiritual “spirits” but to be more holy.  Pray for Carrey a lost soul. He is as confused and angry as his comedic movie characters often are.

“Grace, and Bill S, you’re all infected by Modernism.”  What I’m “infected” with is education.  I’m always amazed when some Catholics long to live in a community that’s part of a third-world country—one in which people dogmatically accept the Church’s teachings without ever raising their hands to question.  There’s a reason why that isn’t a description that fits most U.S. Catholics and it isn’t the “gay agenda” (whatever that is) or selfishness or “modernism”—it’s education.  The more education one receives, the more one meaningfully questions one’s beliefs.  Unquestioned beliefs are truly frightening.  And sorry, but they *aren’t* evidence of faith but instead of blind allegiance.  In perusing the comments here, one might surmise that some here are sorry that the Enlightenment occurred, or that college education is far more standard than it was in the past.  That’s…sad.

Grace,

Sorry, but based on my conversations with you, you seem to have an inability to distinguish between what is Catholic theology and what is not to begin with, so why should anybody believe that you actually know what you are talking about.

Grace, what do you mean by “education”? What were you educated in? By whom? Being educated today means nothing. Compared to what one was educated in previous generations, we are not educating but indoctrinating. Higher ed used to teach HOW to think, today they teach WHAT to think. Logic and rhetoric are out the door as they too PC. So the subject is off the table. Right and wrong is off the table too.

Modernism is a way of thinking that is man centered. Denying the spiritual side of our lives. I’m being very simplistic in my description but it pretty much says it all. Faith is after all believing in something that you can’t see or touch.

The Enlightenment gave birth to Modernism. You’re right there. However you cannot deny that, societally speaking, we are in a mess. I don’t know what world you’re living in but just look around. There is a spiritual depletion here. Manifesting itself in very ugly ways.

In my opinion, it’s because we’ve stopped trying to keep the laws of God. We’ve replaced the Ten Commandments with the Ten Suggestions. The further we walk away from God the more Satan enters our lives.

Modernism is a pernicious ideology that disguises itself in lofty rhetoric - social justice being one. Under social justice almost anything becomes permissible. Yes, even gay “marriage.” Using education in logic and rhetoric, one would think clearly and see that such as notion as gay “marriage” was absurd. The Church teaches that the primary purpose of marriage is procreation and not love as the modernist proposes.

Modernism was condemned by almost every Pope since the mid-1800s when it reared its ugly head. It was fought tooth and nail by the papacy and went underground until the mid-20th century. The greatest exponents of Modernism are the Masons, who by their own admission, have acknowledged a greater Masonic influence on the Church than they’ve ever enjoyed. By the way the primary mission of the Masons is the destruction of the Roman Catholic Church and replacement with Pantheism.

I’m not smart enough to have all the answers, nor do I think you do either.
We’re just two voices in the ether. St Paul warned those who would distort or change what was handed down to us with damnation to hell. I suggest you look more deeply into why you think the way you think. Maybe a little more educatin’ would really help you.

Third world countries are third world countries because of the actions of first world countries and not the Catholic Church. The Church was set up by Christ to save souls. Hell is real and we must never forget that.

Savvy, I’m painfully aware of what is Catholic theology and what is not.  Simply because I question doesn’t mean I’m ignorant—that’s a straw man if ever there were one.

Grace,

You compared Catholic teachings on marriage to murder that is not questioning. That being said, it was Jesus who clearly said, marriage was between a man and a woman and that marriage was the only place for sexual activity. It sounds like the person you have issues with is not the church, but Jesus himself.

Nope—Jesus and I are good.  But I don’t remember comparing Catholic teachings on marriage to murder.  Huh?

Grace,

You are ignoring Jesus’s teachings on marriage. You compared the church not accepting homosexuality to the inquisition.

No, I didn’t.  I used the Inquisition to highlight an issue (anti-Judaism) that used to be accepted in the Church and is now rejected (witness Nostra Aetate).  My point then and now is that the Church *does* change.  Of course the notion of transubstantiation isn’t going anywhere, nor any of the components of the creed.  But in other areas, change is indeed possible.  I’m not ignoring Jesus’ teachings on marriage: you’re conflating them to suit your interests.

Grace,

Nostra Aetate was saying the same things as the Council of Trent, which was the counter-reformation . You might want to read it. Doctrine does not change, it develops.

“I’m not ignoring Jesus’ teachings on marriage: you’re conflating them to suit your interests.”

What do you mean by conflating?

Comedians aim their ridiculing humor at the Catholic Church because it has been an easy target.  Catholic priests and Bishops have committed depressingly offensive sins while posing as religious leaders.  This hypocrisy of Catholic leaders renders the church a target of ironic humor.

Meanwhile there are obvious remedies that the church has refused to adopt.  The declining numbers of Priests has caused a labor shortage, making it difficult to dismiss the sinful offenders.  So, bad Priests are merely reassigned, instead of being dismissed.  This practice of reassignment does great harm to the image of the Church.  Allowing women to be Priests would lend greatly needed relief.  Immediately, the size of the applicant pool could double, reducing the need to retain bad Priests.  And, the female priests might be less likely to condone the furtive molestation children.  The persistent institutional tolerance of molestation has been a horrible blight upon the image of the Church. 

There are many other improvements that could be adopted.  But allowing women to be priests is a good start. Nothing in the Bible prevents it.  Only later misogynist declarations do. 

“The Church was set up by Christ to save souls. Hell is real and we must never forget that.”

Peter, I would hate for you to have to live your whole life believing that Hell is real. Can’t you see that Heaven and Hell are the carrot and stick of religious leaders who want to entice and scare us all into following them?

Savvy, you need to do some reading of your own.  I’d suggest the antisemitic teachings of St. John Chrysostom, for example, or various medieval popes.  It’s amusing that you think Nostra Aetate is just a rehashing of older Church teachings—what do you think the role of Christianity actually *was* in the lead-up to the Holocaust?  Regardless, there is nothing so fundamental about the Church’s position on homosexuality that it can’t be altered.  Moreover, it should have no need to block *civil* marriages between gays and lesbians.  Conflating = “Combine (two or more texts, ideas, etc.) into one” (thanks, Merriam-Webster).

Bill, I just don’t know what to make of you. What has closed your heart?  What has made you so unhappy? Jehova’s Witnesses who come to my door tell me the same thing as you do - they have the truth of the Bible and that the Church was hijacked from Christ by corrupt Church officials. Maybe you should join them and stop annoying people on this blog. I don’t think you’re convincing anyone.

Paul R, and what dogma would allow you to have priestesses? The dogma of convenience? As Chesterton has so cogently said:
“Christianity has not been tried and found wanting; it has been found difficult and left untried.”

Grace, go get an education regarding the Inquisition which was founded way before the expulsion of the Jews from Spain. You’re using your modernist uninformed mind to justify your contemporary biases. If you knew the teachings of the Church you will know that it has always taught - at least until the last 50 years - that there is no salvation outside the Church. Forcibly converting the Jews was “saving” them in the Church’s eyes. There is even a part of the Traditional Mass that prays for their conversion. It was dropped after Vatican II.

Much of the confusion of Catholics today can be laid at the mess that Vatican II created. The Church practically reinvented itself. A Catholic from 1960 would not recognize the Church of today.
To quote my favorite Chesterton again - “The modern world is insane, not so much because it admits the abnormal as because it cannot recover the normal.”

Fun fact, Migo: I teach about the Holocaust and the history of anti-Judaism at the college level.  I’ve had years of education on both subjects and I’ve published on both.  “Forcibly converting the Jews was ‘saving’ them in the Church’s eyes.”  Wow, that sure is one way to look at the situation…  Horrifying and revisionist but I suppose it’s a way.  Your obsession with telling others to leave (both this blog and the Church itself) is tiresome.  Clearly, none of us are leaving either.  Accept it.  You’re stuck.  Unless of course *you* leave.

Fun fact: you guys are off topic.

Grace,

The opinions of saints and Popes, are not official doctrine on faith and morals. Do you even know what doctrine is?  That dog just won’t hunt. The rest is speculation too.

Marriage is a public institution and children need a mother and father, biological or otherwise.

Paul,

What is a priest? Why do you want one?

Grace,  if you are so well-educated, you know that one is a heretic if they deny one teaching of the Catholic faith. (Catechism of the Catholic church, 2089)  I don’t understand why these cafeteria Catholics don’t leave the faith and find another Christian denomination or religion with which they agree.  Can you be a cafeteria American, and pick and choose what law you want to obey?

Grace, Christians should NOT be in communion with the Jews.  They have rejected the Messiah, (God).  They are no longer the chosen people because of their rejection.  Jews cannot get into heaven.  Jesus said, the only way to the father is through me.

Posts are showing up in my inbox that aren’t posting here, so I have no idea who wrote and asked about my education—I’ll assume it was Migo for now.  I was educated by various international institutions, including those in the U.S., Israel, and Europe.  All of them are widely viewed as stellar, though I doubt that would mean much to you.  It’s humorous that you think education today is simply indoctrination, since it seems clear that your view of “good” education *is* indoctrination for the Catholic Church.  There is no logic behind arguments against gay marriage—those arguments are not based on the rules of reason but instead on unexamined beliefs.  I know this because I also teach argument and have dismantled the claims made against same-sex marriage extremely easily.  Your comments about Vatican II identify you as schismatic.  You have no more rightful claim to the title of Catholic than the supposed heretics you condemn here.  I’m consistently involved in education—both secular and religious.  It is my everyday world.  I’m guessing the same cannot be said for you.

Oh, wow, Joe—you need to read further about the Church’s position on Judaism.  I will pray for you as you casually condemn others who are in communion with the same God to hell.  And savvy, that’s neat: the teachings and the actions of the pope are divorced from the doctrine of the Church.  Who’s the cafeteria Catholic now?

Grace,

There may have been Popes who were cafeteria Catholics, but none of them taught or changed any doctrine. The Holy Spirit prevented them from doing so.

You and Joe have one thing in common. You both think V2 was a break rather than a continuity. Traditionalists and liberals have both been called out on this.

Grace, if it is the position of the church post-Vatican II, I reject it.  And I can, because it wasn’t a dogmatic council.  According to the bible. “Christ shall be slain, and the people who shall deny him shall not be his.” Daniel9:26.  “Those who die as infidels are damned.”  Pope Pius X.  “Whoever revolts, and continues not in the doctrine of Christ, has not God.”  II St. John 1:9.  Against the first commandment, all those sin who do not have faith.  Such sinners are very numerous, for they include all who fall into heresy, all who reject what Holy Mother the Church proposes for our belief.”  Catechism of Trent. “If any man does not enter the Church, or if any man departs from it, he is far from hope of life and salvation.”  Pope Pius XI. “No one can be saved outside the bosom and unity of the Catholic church.”  Council of Florence. “This true Catholic faith, outside which no one can be saved.”  Papal Oath:  Vatican I council. “Unbelief is a mortal sin.”  Council of Trent.  There are many more quotes.  Find the book “The Apostolic Digest”  with many more quotes.

Apparently, the moderators can’t handle the truth.  They have considered my quotations from the church, spam.

“Bill, I just don’t know what to make of you. What has closed your heart?  What has made you so unhappy?”

Finding out that I have wasted my life being religious

Joe, you’re taking the lazy way through life. Instead of developing your own worldview, you have chosen to be the Catholic equivalent of the scribes and the Pharisees. You’re like a Catholic fundamentalist. I can’t believe that we can still find someone in the 21st century who still believes that the Jews are going to Hell and only believers in Jesus are going to Heaven. How childish.

Bill, please your posts are so ridiculous!! You don’t agree with Jesus who said, the only way to the father is through me?

Posted by Joe DeCarlo on Wednesday, Mar 20, 2013 12:31 PM (EDT):
“Bill, please your posts are so ridiculous!! You don’t agree with Jesus who said, the only way to the father is through me?”

It sounds like a perfect sales pitch. How to get a captive audience. You’re just being a buffoon believing that the Jews are going to Hell.

This is too funny.  The Church has never been anti-Judaism—no, wait!  It hasn’t been anti-Judaism enough!  I guess papal bulls never lead to accepted doctrine.  For folks who seem obsessed with professing their understanding of the faith as the truth, you sure seem to have some bizarre notions of Catholicism.  At least so-called progressive Catholics basically line up with one another.  It appears that trads encompass any and all manner of beliefs.

I would suggest to everyone that they get a copy of “The Apostolic Digest” Michael Malone, editor.  Read the teachings of the Catholic church, its popes and Saints, etc.

I would suggest that everyone learn to read others’ posts, Joe.  I’ve already stated that I’m not ignorant of the Church’s teachings, popes, and saints.

Grace, then you know what other Councils, popes and Church fathers have said about those without faith in Jesus Christ.

Grace, then you know what other Councils, popes and Church fathers have said about those without faith in Jesus Christ.  Those who are baptized will be saved, those who are not will be condemned.  Have those teachings changed?

Joe,

To an atheist, you are truly obnoxious. You’ve swallowed the bait: hook, line and sinker. You will never experience anything that in any way would approach a personal Enlightenment. You are steeped in Catholic dogma, doctrine and tradition. You embody the absurdity of the Catholic faith. I suppose I shouldn’t be berating you on a Catholic blog but it irks me that you think that because you are such a devout Catholic, that somehow makes you a wise and decent person. It doesn’t.

Grace, I’m well-educated in the faith also.  But the book I recommended is well worth it.

Bill, When I post something, I can back it up with a citation.  You can rant all you want.

Bill, I understand that you don’t agree with the teachings.  Don’t blame me, I’m only following the teachings of the church with which I agree.  Do you want me to agree with you when you are wrong?  I can’t do it.

You are every bit a lost soul to Reason as you think I and the Jews are to Faith.

Joe, read this: http://forums.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=10688

Bill S,

You are a very strange creature. Catholicism is both faith and reason. You pit one against the other. If you do not even believe in God or Jesus, then why are you even Catholic? Non-Catholics are more honest that confused Catholics.

Grace,

No Grace, Not all Papal bulls deal with doctrine. They are subject to time and place. Doctrine is different. As for Anti-Judaism, we believe Jesus is the son of God and the Messiah, so to Jews this is always going to be seen as anti-judaism.

It’s more like you people read from the same script. I am not a trad, I disagree with Joe on his interpretations of church teachings.

“Catholicism is both faith and reason. You pit one against the other.”

You say that but you don’t show any reason and resort strictly to Catholic teachings that you accept as a matter of faith and without questioning. I’ve been trying to use reason with you but all you do is cite the Catechism or some other source that cannot be disputed. I’m a Catholic, but not a believer. It’s complicated.

Bill S,

It’s because you claim to be Catholic, that I quote Catholic teachings. If you had posed as an atheist, I would have no issues with you.

Grace,

Orthodox Judaism has the same views on homosexuality. I suppose this makes them anti-judaism too.

“Orthodox Judaism has the same views on homosexuality. I suppose this makes them anti-judaism too.”  What?  That “gotcha” analogy seriously makes no sense.  Savvy, you may not agree with Joe on all points, but you both clearly need to read more about Judaism and its history with Christianity and the Church, specifically.

Grace,

You are the one that compared anti-Judaism to anti-homosexuality.  Not me. I am aware of Judaism’s history with Christianity and the oldest Christian churches. This still does not prove your argument, because it’s unrelated.

Oh, my.  http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/20/world/americas/pope-francis-old-colleagues-recall-pragmatic-streak.html?pagewanted=all

Savvy, you’re clearly absolutely opposed to attempting an understanding of my reason for introducing anti-Judaism into the conversation, even though I’ve clarified it twice.  Too bad.

Grace,

FYI. I support civil unions without adoptions, but not marriage.

I get your point, that the church has changed in the past and can change. The question is who are you to decide this?

The majority of Catholics and Christians worldwide oppose gay marriage, abortion and the Western obsession with sex.

As the centre shifts, Western concerns are about to become less important. John Allen discusses this in his book, “Future Church” and the Anglican , Philip Jenkins, in “The Next Christendom.”

Christianity in the global south is politically liberal, but socially conservative, hence the old labels do not apply.

You mistakenly assume that I’m wanting the Church to change its teachings to suit my own interests.  I’m not gay.  I was married in the Church and have been blessed with 17 years of marriage with my husband.  My position comes from an awareness of and respect for basic human rights.  I recognize that gays and lesbians are denied hundreds of rights that are given to heterosexual married couples in the U.S.  I think I stated earlier that I don’t care if the Church doesn’t sanction gay marriages—I care if it blocks civil marriages.  Civil unions are a start and at least a common point for you and me in this conversation.  “The majority of Catholics and Christians worldwide oppose gay marriage, abortion and the Western obsession with sex.”  If your claim here is that all Catholics should do likewise because the majority agrees, this is an ad populum appeal—so while I’m not trying to dismiss your claims, you’ll understand (I hope) why I don’t respond to this one.

The Jews rejected Christ as the Messiah. Today’s Jews know about Jesus and his teachings. They have rejected him.  So, if they reject Jesus, they reject God.  They are no longer the chosen people.  Would God (Jesus) continue to call them the chosen people.  We, Christians, are the new chosen people.

Grace, I know about the baptism of desire and blood.  This has nothing to do with the Jews who know about Jesus and they reject him.  I don’t condemn people who never had the chance to hear his teachings.  Of course, they had a chance of salvation.  I’m talking about those who know the teachings and reject him- the Jews are included.

Joe,

You’ve got to stop your silly talk about the Jews. You are way out of line. You can cite all the references you want. It only goes to show that there is no common ground between your faith (in your references) and reason (what kind of God would send Jews to Hell for rejecting Jesus?).

Grace,

There is nothing under international law that says gay marriage MUST be legalized, much less imposed or that is MUST be a human right.

Children need a mother and a father, biological or otherwise.

Bill S,

I appreciate the fact that you are trying to understand the church’s teachings, without arguments that resort to belief.

I would recommend JP’2 “Love and Responsibility” . It is a school of philosophy called personalism, and not just religion.

Thanks Savvy. Maybe I will check it out.

Bill S,

You can also check out the personalist project. Not all personalist philosophers agree on everything, but they do agree that there is a need to re-asses how we see the human person in the light of true humanism.

http://www.thepersonalistproject.org/

People should be careful when making comments about other religions. Some comments here resemble insults because they misinterpret the beliefs of other religions.  It’s difficult enough to be expert in the teachings your own branch of Christianity.  It’s nearly impossible, simultaneously, to be expert in all Christian sects and the various sects of Judaism.  So, even if you are an expert, please be careful and thoughtful when attributing beliefs to other religions. 

Further, it’s unnecessary to say negative things such as “So, if they reject Jesus, they reject God. They are no longer the chosen people.”  That sounds spiteful. I hope it wasn’t meant to be.  It’s perfectly OK to claim that we Christians are now the chosen people. But it’s NOT OK to deny other people their own right to that claim.  That’s what “Freedom of Religion” means.

Rejoice that you are the chosen people, but don’t rejoice that someone else isn’t chosen. That’s a very un-Christian emotion; that’s schadenfreude.

The more we abuse our rights, the more likely we are to lose them.

Ok Savvy. Thank you.

The UN Declaration of Human Rights states in Article 2, “Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind…”  Article 16 reads as follows: “1) Men and women of full age, without any limitation due to race, nationality or religion, have the right to marry and to found a family. They are entitled to equal rights as to marriage, during marriage and at its dissolution. (2) Marriage shall be entered into only with the free and full consent of the intending spouses. (3) The family is the natural and fundamental group unit of society and is entitled to protection by society and the State.”  This document, then, does not identify what must comprise a family, nor does it limit marriage to male-female relationships.  It does, however, make it quite plain that every citizen of a UN member country is guaranteed equal rights, including marriage, without distinction.  Without.  Distinction.

Paul,

I agree with your most recent post. Hollywood and the secular media needs to stop giving theology lectures. It’s the arrogance of ignorance.

Joe,

It’s quite possible for both to be chosen.

Those who are baptized will be saved, those who are not will be condemned.  Words of Jesus.  Yes, those who had no chance to know the faith, those who desire baptism, and those by blood can be saved.  But don’t you think that the Rabbis that hold hands with the Pope know and have studied the New Testament?  They have rejected Jesus and are condemned.  These are not my words. They are Jesus’s words.

Joe,

Seriously, you are playing a Sola Scriptura game. Read scripture in the light of church teachings.

savvy, I have books on church teachings.  I’m giving you the teaching and dogma of the church before the Judas (Vatican II) council.  No salvation outside the church was an infallible teaching, reinforced at two councils.

savvy, get the book “The apostolic Digest.  It has scriptures, Church council dogma, Father of the church statements and popes proclamations.

Joe,

There still is no salvation outside the church. The question is what do you mean by church? Just the visible church or the church as the mystical bride of Christ.

Joe,

Self-professed Liberal Catholics make the same claim as you. The fact is that V2 need not teach new doctrine. It was a continuity, not a break. So both of you need to stop this nonsense.

@ Joe De Carlo: You said:
“Those who are baptized will be saved, those who are not will be condemned.  Words of Jesus. ....  They have rejected Jesus and are condemned.  These are not my words. They are Jesus’s words.”

That sounds like an unnecessary display of hate. I hope you don’t mean to be hateful. Maybe you should change your wording.  Perhaps say, “They won’t be saved.”
Statements of condemnation are why militant Christians are branded as hateful.  It’s perfectly OK for you to BELIEVE that other people are condemned.  It is not OK to post on website that Jews are condemned.

@Migo:  You addressed me (Paul R.) but didn’t address my point. 

I said “... allowing women to be priests is a good start. Nothing in the Bible prevents it.  Only later misogynist declarations do.”

You attempt, but fail to refute that point by saying “what dogma would allow you to have priestesses? The dogma of convenience? As Chesterton has so cogently said: .....”

Then, oddly, the quote from Chesterton doesn’t mention female priests, unless you mean to include that in Chesterton’s broad rejection of modernity.  Your argument fails to justify the ban on female priests by lack of specificity.

The burden of proof lies upon the people who ban female priests.  If the Bible doesn’t prevent it, then dogma must produce a reason for the ban.  [Not the other way around.]

Paul,

Before debating these issues, you should be able to answer these questions. What is a priest? What you need one for?

Only Catholics, Orthodox and Anglicans have priests to begin with.

Grace,

Jimmy Akin, explains why the then Archbishop saw civil unions as the lesser evil, not that he thought it was a good thing.

http://www.ncregister.com/blog/jimmy-akin/pope-francis-on-homosexual-unions

@savvy, you said

“Paul,

Before debating these issues, you should be able to answer these questions. What is a priest? What you need one for?

Only Catholics, Orthodox and Anglicans have priests to begin with.”

In my message, I mentioned “Catholic” priests. In that message I also non-specifically mentioned priests.  I didn’t mean to imply any priests other than Catholic (and I never mentioned either Orthodox or Anglicans.)  Yes, I didn’t specifically deny implying other sects.  So I will now: I did not mean to imply any other priests than Catholic Priests. 

    You also asked me to define “What is a priest? What you need one for?”  In my opinion those questions have no bearing on whether a woman can be a priest.  If you think those questions bear upon the issue, then I’d be interested to hear why. 

  And I think that the Catholic Church would benefit from allowing woman not only to be priests but also to hold positions in the high-level administration of the Catholic Church.

  I think that women are equal to men in the eyes of god.

Paul,

Yes, we women are equal to men in the eyes of God, but that is not the issue. Women already hold positions in the high-level administration of the Catholic church. It’s not publicized, but it exists.

The priesthood is founded on the person of Jesus Christ, the high priest whose unique sacrifice, is enacted at every Mass, and the bread and wine transformed into his body and blood. A priest is one who offers sacrifice. A Catholic priest offers the sacrifice of Christ, and acts in his person in administering the sacraments.

Christ death brings us new life. With a male priest, there is no doubt that new life comes from Christ, because men do not give birth. With a woman priest, it would get confusing about whether new life comes from the Christ or from the woman. It’s the cross that unites both men and women. Like the centre piece.

As, Migo, pointed out priestess is a different religion, a different God.

Mr. De Carlo,

You talk about Catholicism being both faith and reason. Yours is all faith and no reason. The only reason you demonstrate is the reason so many people have stopped going to church. It is definitely faith vs. reason, not faith and reason. It is stop questioning and believe. And I wouldn’t cite past popes. They were as out of touch with reality then as you are now. Please stop assuming that Christians go to Heaven and everyone who rejects Christianity goes to Hell. It’s embarrassing.

Bill, you are a lost cause.  I can’t cite past popes, because you don’t agree with them?  I can’t cite past Councils because you don’t agree with them?  I can’t quote saints, because you don’t agree with them?

You can’t even use your own common sense. You need a citation from Catholic sources (God forbid that you check any non-Catholic sources) for everything. You couldn’t possibly evangelize with your narrow minded view of the world. Who would listen to you?  How did people’s strict adherence to religious laws work out for Jesus?  Is that what he preached?

Yes, I agree with the church’s teachings.  Homosexuality is a disorder and abortion is murder. You don’t agree with the teachings and that is your right.  Secondly, common sense isn’t so common.

I’ve said what I have to say, I won’t be posting anymore.  Everyone knows where I stand.

Now I feel bad. Sorry, Joe. I did value your comments. Sorry if I chased you away. You might want to try thinking about how you would feel if you were one of the people who you claim are going to Hell. Try to do it assuming that Catholic teaching just might be incorrect many ways. Don’t feel like you can’t comment any more. Your input livens the discussions.

Bill, you didn’t chase me away.  My comment about those going to hell was taken from the words of Jesus.  I didn’t make them up.  Those who are baptized will be saved.  Those who are not baptized are condemned.  The church qualifies it by saying that people who never had the change to hear the teachings of Jesus, those who desired to be baptized and never had the chance and those who shed their blood for Jesus but never had the opportunity to be baptized.  These people will be saved.  But the Jews rejected Jesus.  They knew, and even today, know his teachings.  Those Rabbis that are in communication with the Pope surely know the teachings of Jesus.  They rejects them.  The church of today doesn’t have the guts to promote that teaching.  The dogmas before Vatican still stand, because Vatican II was a pastoral council.  There were no new dogmas that were proclaimed.  Now, the church says that the Catholic church subsists in the Church of God, or something like that.  I never heard that before Vatican II.  I’m 66 yrs. old.  I was taught that the church is one, holy, Catholic and apostolic.  The church says this because they want to include the Protestant churches. I can understand that because Protestants are Christians too.  But the Catholic church was founded by Jesus.  The Protestant churches were founded by men well after the Catholic church was founded.

Joe, I am 61and raised Catholic in East Boston. For 60 years, I believed some of what you believe but not to your extreme. It is safe to say that you are the product of extreme indoctrination and you may never see any other worldview as being more truthful than what you have been taught and then instructed yourself further by reading primarily Catholic sources.

I know plenty of people like you and they all seem to be fat, dumb and happy. Not to imply that you are any of these. My only gripe comes in seeing how people like you are so sure that you are right and that people with different views are not only wrong but hell bound. It’s hard to have a pluralistic society when some of us only see life as black and white with no gray areas.

Joe D. well said. Vatican II was the turning point in modern world and Church history. VII essentially showed the world that the truth the Church had been teaching for 2000 years was incorrect or changeable. Once we got to that anything was possible. The Pope is no longer the ultimate word in the Church but the Curia and the local Council of Churches. In only a brief 50 years the world has turned on its head.
I don’t mean to cast aspersions on those who disagree with the teachings of the Church. I don’t know who’ll be saved or not. And no one else does either. At least not on this side of life.
What I find troubling is that since one can express any opinion, we have to take them seriously. What they are doing is sowing doubt. Now, we’re talking religion here. Not science. The proofs we look for are not in a laboratory but the everyday life of people. Those looking for scientific proof of the teachings of the church without the Theology involved in getting us there are only seeing things with one eye.
The Church has resolved all the issues that people seem to be complaining about. It’s as though they’ve come late to the party. Their answer to us believers is that we’re blind, non-thinking boobs, weak, who fail to see what’s in front of our eyes. So they don’t argue the dogma but call us names and try to embarrass us into shutting up. It’s the PC brigade at work.
Modernism at work - don’t argue the point, shame the believer. They’ve all become Voltaires. Or is that Alinsky?
Paul, I was being serious. What would be your justification for women priests? Your opinion? I can just see the sermon about turning the other cheek. Chesterton does not mention priestesses because the whole notion in his time was rediculous.

“By false doctrines concerning God heretics wound faith, by iniquitous dissensions schismatics deviate from fraternal charity, although they believe what we believe” (St. Augustine, De fide et symbolo, ix)

I’m not fat.  I’m in very good shape because I workout at a gym and I have a personal trainer. I’m not dumb because I have a MA in history and a BA in theology.  I taught in a Catholic High school for 33 years and retired at the age of 55.  I’m very happy with my life.  I have 6 boys.  Two are doctors, one lawyer, one editor with a publishing co., one history professor and one in law school.  My wife is a retired lawyer. 

I know that there are gray areas.  I listed them when I was talking about those who could be saved. Again, you can’t be a cafeteria Catholic.  I informed you previously that if you don’t believe one of the teachings of the Church you are a heretic. I gave you the quote from the Catechism.  I happened to believe in all the teachings of the church.  If I didn’t, I would find a Christian denomination with which I agree.

Bill S, Why are you mocking Joe for his faith?
You want him to read non catholic sources that have an axe to grind with the Church to weaken his faith. What’s to be learned by that. How much time did you spend studying the faith you were born into. Frankly, if your faith is so weak why do you still call yourself a Catholic and why are you here on the NCR? This is a Catholic site. Why do you disrespect the people who are on it and support Catholic teachings?
We’re Catholic because we believe in the Church as the one founded by Our Lord. We believe in the afterlife and the Church as a means of getting us there. You seem to believe in creating a heaven on Earth. You seem like a very unhappy person from your notations here.
Jesus saith unto him, “Ego sum via, veritas et vita nemo venit ad Patrem nisi per me.”

@ Migo.  You said:
Jesus saith unto him, “Ego sum via, veritas et vita nemo venit ad Patrem nisi per me.”

You are using quotations marks, attributing a quote to Jesus.  But that quote is in Latin.  You are here, on an English website.  You are speaking English as context.  And then you attribute a quote to Jesus in Latin?  Why? 

Jesus never spoke in Latin.  Therefore, you are asking us to translate from Latin a quote from Jesus.  But that quote had previously been translated by someone else into Latin.

That’s circumlocution.  Either present the quote in English or present the quote in the original language.  Don’t complicate the matter by unnecessarily introducing a third language (Latin.)

Bill S,  Let me give you a couple of quotes from the Post Vatican popes.  Pope John Paul I.  “I profess that no one outside the Catholic church is saved.”  Pope Paul VI. ” The entrance to salvation is open to no one outside the church.” Pope John Paul II.  “There is no salvation in no one except Christ, and the Church is His body.” Pope Paul VI “The Church is one, and must be one.  This unity can be realized only by the profession of one faith, by the reception of the same sacraments, and by an organic adherence to one solitary ecclesiastical authority.”  Again Pope Paul VI “He who thinks he can remain a Christian by his own efforts, deserting the institutional bonds of the visible hierarchical church, is deceiving himself.  The fact remains that God established His Church as a bridge over which we must pass, leading from our unhappy lot to His salvation.” Again Paul VI “...those outside the church do not posses the Holy Ghost. The Catholic church alone is the Body of Christ, and if a man be separated from the Body of Christ he is not one of His members nor is he feed by His Spirit.”

Paul R. Walsh Jesus might have spoken Latin.  He had to communicate with the Romans.

Lighten up, Migo. I am having a good conversation with Joe. He is very successful and I respect his opinion. However, since he has been so successful being Catholic, he sees it as the only true worldview.  I’m trying to tell him that his is one of many worldviews and that other ones do not condemn Jews and gays.

@ Joe DiCarlo:  you said:
“Paul R. Walsh Jesus might have spoken Latin. He had to communicate with the
Romans.”
It’s irrelevant whether Jesus was capable of speaking Latin.  When quoting anyone, you must quote that particular words in the language in which it was spoken.  Or, if it’s translated, then you must indicate the translator (or, at least, which book it’s from.)

And to more directly address the issue, Migo quoted Jesus. But Migo provided us with no reference for the quote.  Whenever anyone is quoted, the quote should be referenced. 

This is an English language website.  Quotes should be in English or in the original language.  Quoting from a third language introduces a second (and unnecessary) level of translation, distorting the original meaning. 

So, to reiterate my point.  Migo quoted Jesus saying something in Latin.  If he wants to attribute a quote to Jesus, he should say where it came from.  If he claims the quote is from Jesus then he must cite a source.  Otherwise, he is inventing quotes.

Savvy, there is more than one Church?  Since when?  I thought the church was one, holy, Catholic and apostolic.

Paul R, Walsh Yes, you should use citations when you use a quote.

Grace, what does the UN have to do with the Catholic church or any church?  There IS a separation of church and state.

Grace,

The very UN article you quote does NOT mention same-sex marriage. You are making an argument from silence.  It does not say that same-sex marriage MUST be legalized or that same-sex marriage MUST be a human right. It mentions a man and a woman and their natural right to a family, since only men and women can bring forth children.

Joe,

I never said there is more than one church. You do know that the church is both visible and invisible per Catholic teaching. So, Christians other than Catholics who do not have formal membership in the visible church, are still part of the mystical body of Christ?

This is different with the Orthodox churches, that are also the visible church.

There is also nothing in Catholic teaching that says, we “know” who is in hell. The church canonizes saints. It does not have a list of who is in hell and who is not.

“There IS a separation of church and state.”  Exactly!  Which is why the Church shouldn’t be invested in denying civil marriages.  Once again (for the third time), I don’t care that the Church doesn’t sanction gay marriage—but it should stop denying civil marriages to gays and lesbians.  Savvy, did you read the final sentences of my last post?

Grace,

Yes, I read the last paragraph, it also does not mention same-sex marriage. The question, I have is have should children be denied the right to a mother and a father?

Guys,
Ego sum via, veritas et vita nemo venit ad Patrem nisi per me.

This quote is not available in Aramaic as far as I know. If it is available it would be gibberish to us today. It is from the Douay-Rheims translation.  After all, Latin IS the language of our Church. I’ve heard it thousands of times in my life. I guess you haven’t.

I didn’t know I was writing here was for grading purposes. I guess my comments don’t have any credibility since I’m not published. Dan Brown is published. Does that make him an expert. I suppose I should shut my ignorant trap let you geniuses continue with the blather.

And Grace, regardless of what you say you know, the Church did believe they were saving the Jews when converting them since she has always taught there is no salvation outside the Church. It’s not revisionist, you are revisionist in creating a past that does not suit reality. You’re problem is you project your supposed modern day “enlightenment” onto whatever went on in the past. Would you have been anti-slavery in 1850? There is no answer because you weren’t there. Are you pro or con-abortion today? How will you be judged in the future? You do not know.

And it’s true - WE ARE OFF TOPIC. It’s been fun but disillusioning at times. From now on, I’m outa here.

Migo,

There is a difference between prosletyzing and evangelizing. The church made a mistake by prosletyzing. Evangelizing is different.

This is however, not relevant to the arguments she is making about homosexuality or gay marriage.

Migo said:

“Paul, I was being serious. What would be your justification for women priests? Your opinion? I can just see the sermon about turning the other cheek. Chesterton does not mention priestesses because the whole notion in his time was rediculous.” 

Well, of course, we all hope that everyone here is being serious.

But you have asked a question that I already answered: “What would be your justification for Catholic women priests?”

I don’t need to justify women priests.  The Bible doesn’t preclude women Priests.  I keep asking the question, “Why can’t women be priests?”.  But you still haven’t answered.  I’ve read the Bible.  I could be wrong, but have found nothing that prevents women from being priests.  If the Bible doesn’t ban women from being priests, then why haven’t we always had women priests? 

Here is the question. PLEASE answer it. 
“If the Bible doesn’t ban female priests, then where is the justification for preventing women from being priests?” 

  Sincerely and honestly, I have asked the question for years.  But no one seems to have an answer.    I gladly welcome any theologians or historians to answer the question.

In my opinion, I think there is an urgent need for new Catholic priests.  Women could answer that need and could fill the vacant positions. 

[Migo: I still see no reason for your invocation of Chesterton.  You admit that Chesterton didn’t mention priestesses.  Chesterton seems irrelevant to the topic.]

Paul,

Do you know the difference between a minister and a priest? We already have women ministers.

There is no evidence to prove that Jesus or his Apostles laid hands on women, to ordain them to be sacrificial priests.

I have already answered your previous questions.

@migo:
Thank you for the reference for the Latin quote.  “It is from the Douay-Rheims translation.”  That’s exactly what I hoped to find.  It’s necessary and appropriate.

But I don’t see why you complained thereafter.  Citing references is critically important if you want to be taken seriously.  Your readers can confirm that you have been accurate in your quotation.  You have proven yourself to be authoritative.  So, please don’t take offense.  Just use proper citation and be proud of your accuracy.

Citing quotations from a speaker is especially important when you quote him using a language that is not his native language.  It’s especially important with Jesus.  On an English language website, if you aren’t quoting English then you should quote Koine Greek, the language of the New Testament.  You allude to Aramaic, but those quotes from Jesus occur very rarely, via Greek in the New Testament.  In nearly all cases, Koine Greek is considered “original” because there is no other, earlier,  Aramaic wording available. If the Jesus’s quote doesn’t appear in the Bible, then it can be appropriate to use Latin.  But I know of no quotes from Jesus which claim that he spoke in Latin himself. 

When you cite Latin, it’s considered best to quote your source.  Or, to quote the Bible passage from which it was excerpted. 

I hope you understand that I am not trying to nasty.  But it’s rare occasion when I’ve seen Christ quoted in Latin.  [At least, that’s true here in the USA.]

As a whole new topic, if you want to talk about Jesus and the Dead Sea Scrolls, then that’s a totally different thing, not pertaining to Latin.

-paul

Paul, sorry, I thought you knew.
Christ inaugurated the priesthood for men. He chose the original 12 who proceeded to inaugurate the MEN as leaders as priests, bishops, etc. They have to be men. The priest serves his duties in Persona Christi. A woman priest could not serve as Christ because he was a male.
The Anglicans, Presbyterians, Methodists, etc. change their beliefs with VOTES. Not on any theological basis. They now have homosexual bishops, priestesses, gay marriage, etc. The whole gamut of modern day social diseases.
It’s not in the Bible but, unless one is a Protestant who believes in Sola Scriptura you would know that the Bible is only a part of the Church’s tradition. For Protestants who believe in Sola Scriptura, where in the Bible does it say that? Sola Scriptura leads to anarchy and dissolution. Observe the massive breakdown of protestant traditions into smaller and smaller churches. They have no bishops or hierarchy to keep them in line. We as Catholics have the Magisterium to teach us about the fullness of our faith.
This had all been made clear and obvious for 2 millenia. Most people left it up to the Bishops and priests to fight over the theological minutiae. As a lay person I did not feel qualified and so humbled myself in what the Church always taught - because she proved trustworthy for lo those 2000 years. What other institution can lay to that claim?
It’s only in the latter half of the 20th century where suddenly ALL catholics thought they had overnight become experts in Church teachings.

It gets tiresome in discussing these basic tenets of our faith with fellow Catholics. We as a Church get enough grief from the world at large. We should spend more time defending her than trying to acquiesce our beliefs to our enemies. The way to do that is to immerse oneself in Catholic literature and Catholic apologetics - what Bill S calls brainwashing. Some of the greatest writers in the English language who converted to Catholicism have had a lot to say about the Church. Their witness offer truly enlightening insights.
I don’t take your comments nastily. I think you have tried to be very fair. If I sound angry it’s because like I said above about defending my faith against supposedly fellow Catholics. I’ve been down this road with friends and family members who purport know their faith and opine on it as though they did. The anger coming from them is palpable at times. At times they don’t seem to know what they’re angry at. They seem to say they have all the answers with what’s wrong with the Church. But in the end, it’s always the Church’s fault.

I only mention Chesterton because he very succinctly and very directly answers most objections people have had with the Church. He was a Protestant convert who spent his life defending and promoting the Church.I find that when I hear or read Protestant converts about their conversion, my faith becomes stronger.

Once again I give you Chesterton,
“Once remove the old arena of the theological quarrels, and you will throw open the whole world to the most horrible, the most hopeless, the most endless, the most truly interminable quarrels; the untheological quarrels.”
Vivat Jesus.

Savvy, the UNDHR doesn’t identify marriage as a heterosexual or homosexual union—it simply states that every male and female citizen of UN member countries is guaranteed the right to marry “without distinction.”  What do you make of this: http://healthland.time.com/2013/03/21/pediatric-group-supports-same-sex-marriage/

Grace,

The UN’s Universal Declaration of Human Rights allows marriage only for “Men and women of full age,” and that the same document “further defines the family as ‘the natural and fundamental group unit of society’” which is “entitled to protection by society and the State.”

It does not say anything about same sex marriage, but it’s implied that men and women marry to form a family.

The AAP, study does not mean that children do not benefit from a mother and father, and that they should replaced.

It also talks about stable marriage between two people. You are naive if you think this is just about two people.  A bisexual mom can have both a woman and man. The kid has to deal with a third person too.

This is not just for two people, but for the LGBT community to have certain legal rights, and then do what they want do.

The UNDHR only explains that men and women—as the only sexes in the human race—are guaranteed the right to marry.  It does not specify or even imply that marriage should be between men and women only.  Just because the phrase “men and women” is used doesn’t mean it’s referring to heterosexuality instead of the two types of humans who exist.  And yes, the UNDHR does refer to the family—but it does not state nor imply a prescribed form for the family.  I’m not trying to be purposely insulting here, but from the description of gay marriage that you presented, I’m guessing you haven’t spent much time with gay parents.  Why not try to lovingly and openly engage with folks from groups like Equally Blessed or Fortunate Families?  I think you’ll find there’s far more “normality” in these families than you seem to assume.

Grace,

Laws do not work that way. Wording is VERY important.  And besides, The gender identity crowd would disagree that men and women are the only two types of human that exist. It would be discriminating against them.

I am not saying that they will always make bad parents, just that children are being robbed of a mother and a father. It is their right to one. It sends a message that sex differences do not count, and that men and women are interchangeable.

Phenomenology is truth as derived from one’s own experience. This means not everybody’s experiences are going to be the same. Hence independent studies are important.

Grace,

The European Court of Justice, the European Court of Human Rights, the United Nations Human Rights Committee, the French Constitutional Court, the Italian Constitutional Court, the German Federal Constitutional Court, and the New Zealand Court of Appeal have all rejected the notion that same-sex marriage is a constitutional or human right.

You can see it here.

http://www.adfmedia.org/files/HollingsworthAmicusIntl.pdf

Savvy you wrote to Grace the following, 
“You are ignoring Jesus’ teachings on marriage. You compared the Church not accepting homosexuality to the inquisition”
 
I would like to add, Grace and or someone else may not be, “ignorant of the Church’s teachings, popes, and saints” as professed earlier in this discussion but they do seem ignorant of inquisition as well as a few other points of doctrine such as justification. Brandishing inquisition around will get us nowhere. The ignorance of the historical record is, well, shocking. Grace’s presuppositions are questionable so do not let her off the hook without challenging them. Very few people actually take the time to understand what occurred over several centuries of inquisition nor do they realize inquisition was not conducted by Catholic authorities alone in all places always with burnings and death! Read the Old Testament and you quickly discover Judaism conducted inquiries “inquisition” into the actions and secret practices of their co-religionists. Was this hateful or protectionist? You be the judge, But since this is “America” (not that I am American) do not get carried away with your rugged individualism Bill. By the way did any of you catch this when it was on PBS, God in America series: John McGreevy interview Bill please check it out you seem to have misunderstood what I had written before when explaining the One Church reality. 

“Laws do not work that way. Wording is VERY important.”  Absolutely!  Which is why the UNDHR doesn’t use the phrase “man and woman” but rather “men and women.”  The claim that gay marriage erases the differences between men and women is a straw man that I often hear on Catholic radio.  Expanding definitions doesn’t mean eliminating them.  “The gender identity crowd would disagree that men and women are the only two types of human that exist. It would be discriminating against them.”  Give the UN time—it just passed historical legislation protecting LGBT citizens.  I’m sure conversations about gender will become more evolved in the next fifty years.  I’d say the same to your comment about those entities that reject gay marriage (see something like http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Publications/BornFreeAndEqualLowRes.pdf).  You can’t really think that this genie is going back in the bottle, can you?  I understand your concerns about children being raised without parents of both sexes—but why should we disregard the conclusions of the American Academy of Pediatrics, which asserts that children of same-sex parents aren’t harmed?

Grace,

It still does not say same-sex marriage. You are reading this into it.  Gender theory replaces sex with gender, to make gender whatever one identifies as.  Gender theory does attempt to erase sex differences. The aim is some kind of androgenous humanity.

There is no scientific evidence to prove that these things are immutable like race. There is a lot of lobbying, so nobody is really objective anymore. Nueroscience also disagrees that differences between men and women are just subjective.

“but why should we disregard the conclusions of the American Academy of Pediatrics, which asserts that children of same-sex parents aren’t harmed?”

In a way they are being harmed by being denied a mother and father, based on what adults want. The same study would have to be done on the other side to prove, that they do not benefit from a mother and a father.

Grace,

I am not sure why my previous post did not show up. Political scientists claim that these studies are being driven by ideology and not science. You might want to see this.

http://www.adfmedia.org/files/HollingsworthAmicusIMAPP.pdf

Gender theory also replaces sex with gender to make gender whatever one identifies with. Nueroscience disagrees that differences between men and women are just subjective.

Migo,  That is a great post.  Thank you

If “no salvation outside the Catholic church” is still a dogma, then how can Jews get into heaven?

Joe,

Look. Why don’t you so some serious study and find out what the term means, not what you think it means.

Savvy, I’m a pre-vatican baby.  When I went to Catholic school, that meant that no non-Christians could be saved. The dogma has been changed.  I have a MA in history and a BA in theology, so I’ve done some study.  Why do you think that the sspx is at odds with the Vatican since Vatican II?  The sspx knows that dogma has been changed, among other dogma.  The sspx religious are very well educated.  Why don’t you tell them to do some serious study.  I think that many of you novus ordo people should do some study.

Joe,

The SSPX is at odds for the same reason that liberals are at odds. Both sides read their own views into these documents, rather than what the documents intend to say. There is a difference between development of doctrine and introducing something that never existed. Development of doctrine is growing into a better understanding of something. It’s not what you think.

Look if Matthew 16:18 has changed. Then Jesus is a liar.

I guess if you hang around long enough you find out what’s really underneath all this hot air regarding same sex anything. So now we know. Some people choose to follow the laws of the UN, The European Union, Psychiatric associations or whatever instead of the laws of God. They used to tell us that 10% of any population is gay. So then we find out it’s only 1%+. We are turning ourselves into pretzels for 1% of the population?!!!!!???
These people live on euphemisms, i.e. LGBT. They of course will have no objections when the next perversions come along. Let me propose some, polygamy (both straight and gay), legalized paedophelia, bestiality (it’s my right and who are you to prevent me from showing my love to my goat, dog rooster, etc?) It’s coming, you’ll see.
Great to see so many Catholics so wrapt up with these ideas. Particularly this close to Easter. Whatever happened to “Cleanliness is next to Godliness”?

“Let me propose some, polygamy (both straight and gay), legalized paedophelia, bestiality (it’s my right and who are you to prevent me from showing my love to my goat, dog rooster, etc?) It’s coming, you’ll see.”

You have deeply offended gays and I expect you to apologize for your crude remarks.

Bill S,

For once we actually agree. Some Homosexuals already name call and insult those who disagree with them. There is no need to stoop to their level, on the other side too.

Migo seems to think that we shouldn’t turn ourselves into pretzels (whatever that means) for a group that only constitutes 1% of any population. I don’t know where he came up with 1%!but I’ll take his word for it. A better question would be “why worry about 1% of the population getting married to the same sex?”

The homophobia and bigotry I find in Migo and his ilk would be humorous if it were not so hurtful. It shows tremendous arrogance and ignorance.

*sigh* Migo, what happened to you leaving the conversation?  Your most recent comments are vomit-inducing.  Thanks for demonstrating so clearly what viewing homosexuality as intrinsically evil devolves into.

For you sensitive types who can’t take another persons’ views seriously, too bad. I don’t want to be hurtful and I haven’t said anything to hurt anyone. If the truth hurts… In the past we know what would follow if we went down a certain road or idea. We have lost our minds. I will not participate. Sorry. Turning yourself into pretzels or worse is what we’re doing. Do you honestly think these new laws are going to make for a better world? Actions have consequences. I have personally lost several friends and acquaintances to dreaded STDs. All in their early 40s. It wasn’t only AIDS. Before there was AIDS there was hepatitis C. I don’t like it. But it would not have happened if they didn’t pursued their activities.
Now our good liberal Bill S is the gatekeeper for offensive remarks against gays. Well he’s said some hurtful things regarding believing Catholics. Am I to tell him I’m hurt? I’m not. I have thicker skin than that. Bill, I think you need to grow up. You’re much too sensitive.

I have stated that I am somewhere in the middle of total affirmation and total rejection. I just think we do not have enough evidence to prove the claims being made. It’s up to those who claim that it’s immutable like race, to come up with the evidence.

You are a sick, sad person, Migo, who is incredibly ignorant and extremely hate-filled.  You should consider the words of Christ more often: “Whatsoever you did for the least…”  Bill has a heart—you’ve clearly abdicated your own.

Migo,

You need to be more charitable. It’s not what your saying. It’s how you are saying it.

Savvy and Grace,
I am being charitable. As far as being sad and sick, you don’t know me. Nor do you I know you. But you do fit a certain modern type who is offended by the slightest perceived thing. I wasn’t addressing you and yet you feel compelled to call me whatever - hatefilled? ignorant?.
Charity begins at home. This is a Catholic site where people have been expressing anti-Catholic opinions. As I said previously, self-loathing Catholics have become a bore. Talk about ignorant, and small minded. You never address any of the facts I say, you just don’t like that I say them. Very PC. I’m not.
If the Church and her teachings are not to your liking, why carp? Do something about it - like leave her to us who are not unhappy with her. So you want the Church that Jesus Christ founded to suit your ideas of what she should and shouldn’t be. What chutzpah! We whom you don’t agree with have been more than charitable.

“This is a Catholic site where people have been expressing anti-Catholic opinions. As I said previously, self-loathing Catholics have become a bore. Talk about ignorant, and small minded.”

Yes, I know.  Sometimes ignoring them is the best thing to do. They like an audience.

Here’s what’s sad, Migo—I have addressed many points that Savvy has asked me to consider.  Though Savvy and I obviously don’t agree on all points, I do feel as though he/she has always treated me with basic respect.  We *do* all know you by your presentation of yourself here—and you’ve given yourself a bad name.  No one else has done that for you.  You use hateful language and assault readers with it—is it any wonder that people think of you as being as vile as your words?  Of course I stand up for Bill when you spew ugliness at him.  To do otherwise would make me a bystander.  He’s actually been quite charitable toward those with whom he disagrees.  If you want a target, here I am.  Leave Bill alone.

Migo,

Your theological views are down right schismatic and now you’re giving the faith a bad name, by insulting others.

Grace,

Thank you for your civility. Children are the only reason the state has a vested interest in marriage. Since this is no longer an issue. Just stop marrying people, and regulate civil unions for all. This way we will ALL be equal.

“Migo,
Your theological views are down right schismatic and now you’re giving the faith a bad name, by insulting others.”

Migo hasn’t done me any wrong but he should think about doing into others as he would have done into him. I am thinking primarily of his attitude toward gays.

Aids is a behavioral disease.  According to stats, gays have an average of 100 sexual partners in a lifetime, in comparison to straights which have 3 sexual partners in a lifetime.

“According to stats, gays have an average of 100 sexual partners in a lifetime, in comparison to straights which have 3 sexual partners in a lifetime.”

Are you saying this as an indictment of gays for their promiscuity or of gay marriage. Seems the whole purpose of marriage is to be faithful to one partner.

I gave stats without an opinion.

Bill,  the main purpose of marriage is procreation. A basic teaching of the Catholic Church for 2 millenia. Remember Natural Law. There is no way our society will survive without procreation. And you’re right Bill, I haven’t done you any wrong - we’re just talking here.

Grace, I could say you’re views are not in line with Catholic tradition or teaching, but I won’t. I could say you’re preaching heresy, but I won’t. I could say you’re much too sensitive to the point where you “feel” offended at the drop of a dime, but I won’t. I could say you live in an ivory tower, but I won’t. I could say you’re overstepping your intellectual abilities, but I won’t. I could say you don’t know what you’re talking about, but I won’t. I’ll let you say it yourself.

Migo, you’re a beast whom no one should feed from this point on.

“the main purpose of marriage is procreation.”
This is interesting. Who’s call is that. We determine the purpose of our lives. Our lives and our marriages have the purposes that we give to it. Please don’t play the “God” card on me.

“A basic teaching of the Catholic Church for 2 millennia.”
That doesn’t mean anything to me or many others. 

“Remember Natural Law.”

There is no such thing unless you are talking about gravity, electromagnetism, etc. 

There is no way our society will survive without procreation.”

Are you saying that things like gay marriage, contraception, etc. pose a real threat to the procreation of the human race?

Bill S,

Perhaps you do not know what natural law means. You seem to be conflating it with the laws of physics.

Savvy,

You can’t take Catholic morals and call them “Natural Law” as if it is a universal set of rules known instinctively by all human beings. There are the laws of nature like gravity, but no “Natural Law”. Trust me. I know.

Bill,

How do you know it’s wrong to kill your mother?

How do you know that gay sexual activity is wrong?  Natural Law?

Bill S,

It does not proceed from the complementarity of men and women. it uses organs created for heterosexual sex for the wrong purposes. There are no homosexual body parts.

“It does not proceed from the complementarity of men and women. it uses organs created for heterosexual sex for the wrong purposes. There are no homosexual body parts.”

How does one take this fact as reason to make it immoral?  It may be impractical and not as much fun, but who are we to tell people they shouldn’t do it?  Is this about your “Natural Law”.

Bill S,

People are free to knock themselves out and suffer with STD’s etc. It’s their life. Others can only tell them, “we told you so”

“There are no homosexual body parts.”  Clearly homosexuals have sex with body parts.  It seems, then, that there *are* homosexual body parts.  When you claim that they’re using organs created for heterosexual sex for the “wrong purposes,” you’re assuming that there is only one “right” purpose.  (And of course, Bill, to gays and lesbians, sex is just as much fun as it might be for heterosexuals.)

Grace,

Common sense indicates this. That sexual organs were created for a purpose.

Common sense and natural laws are tricky things—the burden of proof is on the individual claiming either to demonstrate that such things exist equally for everyone.

“Clearly homosexuals have sex with body parts.  It seems, then, that there *are* homosexual body parts.”

No,  Gay men and women are still men and women. There are no homosexual body parts.

“Common sense and natural laws are tricky things—the burden of proof is on the individual claiming either to demonstrate that such things exist equally for everyone.”

2+2 is not 4 for everyone I suppose. A dog only has 2 legs. Now, if someone wants to argue that 2+2 is 5 for them or that a dog has 2 legs, because that is how they “perceive” it so be it.

“2+2 is not 4 for everyone I suppose. A dog only has 2 legs. Now, if someone wants to argue that 2+2 is 5 for them or that a dog has 2 legs, because that is how they “perceive” it so be it.

Savvy,

You can’t compare objective truths like 2+2=4 to something as subjective as common sense. My common sense tells me that gay marriage is none of your business since it doesn’t involve you. Your common sense tells you that people without complimentary body parts should not be allowed to marry.

Bill S,

It’s more like my commons sense tell me that there is no such thing as gay marriage and marriage is a public institution, hence its affects everybody.

It affects everyone but not everyone can enjoy its privileges?

That’s exactly the point; our ideas of common sense have nothing in common thereby making it subjective as opposed to objective.  So you can’t base your argument on what you think is common sense or Natural Law or anything else that is biased by your faith.

Bill S,

We have nothing in common, perhaps because you have no common sense.

Grace,

Some privileges come with strings attached for others, such as in Canada, where govts are telling religious schools that you cannot teach your views on sexual ethics, and you must be forced to accept gay clubs.

We never had these issues before gay marriage was legalized, and were fed the same lines, about my marriage will not affect you, you will be free to teach your religion, ethics, blah, blah.

“We have nothing in common, perhaps because you have no common sense.”

Savvy,

Since faith itself often defies common sense and since you base all of your reasoning on your faith in the teachings of the Catholic Church, it stands to reason that yours is not a universal or general common sense but more of a religious common sense. If it works for you, fine. But please don’t try to present it as common sense in the way that the term applies to people in general. It’s not. It is very much predicated on canon law and other Catholic sources.

Bill S,

So I take it you would be in favour of group marriage then?

Bill S,

If Catholicism defies common sense, why are you still Catholic? Why don’t you practise what you preach.

And it turns out we Natural law crazies were right after all. Straight from the Horse’s Mouth.

The URL is here: [http://www.advocate.com/printArticle.aspx?id=211497]

The Catholic Church’s “teachings” come from Her founder, Christ. All the Church is is the protector of Christ’s teachings, an, authorized by Christ, and guaranteed the protection of the Holy Spirit. Feeding the world the true Body and Blood of Jesus in the Eucharist. The fullness of faith—-all seven sacraments. It’s pretty simple really.

Yet so misunderstood, berated, slandered…just as Jesus foretold.

And so many try to copy the Faith…the Eucharist, born out of Love…which they cannot do as they have no Authority. This Catholic Church is a wonderful, beautiful divine institution—-as Christ is as well, and He is Her head.

Yet God knows that we are human and hurt and can hurt each other. While there is such a thing as absolute truth—God and His laws—God is a merciful God. This forum started regarding Jim Carrey’s issues against the Catholic Church and has crumbled into other attacks against each other. Sad.

“While there is such a thing as absolute truth—God and His laws—God is a merciful God.”

While everything else you said sounded just ducky, I have to disagree with your idea of “absolute truth”.  “God and His Laws” is a theological concept that does not have a lot of bearing on the real laws that govern our lives.  And mercy is not an option if we violate these laws. We break and receive forgiveness for the laws you are talking about. That sort of cancels them out when the truth is that they were never real laws to begin with. Just a thought for what it’s worth.