This is a poll from a local news website in my area. Basically not adhering to Catholic teachings has a 15 point edge. How the hell can a Catholic be a Catholic if they change their Religious Beliefs just to fit in with modern times!
http://www.baynews9.com/
Do you agree with Pope Francis that the Catholic Church must better balance its divisive rules about abortion, gays, and contraception?
Yes(50%)
No(35%)
Not sure(15%)
I carry a gun because I can't carry a cop on my back!
Why are you blaming the Catholics when the Pope himself said the same thing?
This Pope is simply reading the writing on the wall. Social issues are divisive and the #1 reason people are leaving the Catholic Church.
All the Pope is saying is that clergy need to be less rigid about excommunicating people just because they have an abortion or happen to be gay.
If the Catholic Church wants to retain its flock, it needs to change with the times. It's not like it hasn't a hundred times already.
Wasn't too long ago that the Church was burning scientists at the stake. Now they run their own science academies!
Times change. Successful churches change with it.
"That tyranny has all the vices both of democracy and oligarchy is evident. As of oligarchy so of tyranny, the end is wealth; (for by wealth only can the tyrant maintain either his guard or his luxury). Both mistrust the people, and therefore deprive them of their arms." -- Aristotle, Book V, 350 B.C.E
You don't change your beliefs just so the little 16 year old bitch down the street that has had 3 abortions will stay with the Church! You don't change your beliefs just to get gays into the Church!Originally Posted by LAGC
What is your definition of a successful Church?
I carry a gun because I can't carry a cop on my back!
A successful church is one with a positive rate of growth of its flock.
Because the fact of the matter is, if it wasn't for Latino immigrants, the Catholic Church would be shrinking here in America, just like it is in Europe. Whites are leaving in droves.
Like I said, this Pope is simply seeing the writing on the wall.
"That tyranny has all the vices both of democracy and oligarchy is evident. As of oligarchy so of tyranny, the end is wealth; (for by wealth only can the tyrant maintain either his guard or his luxury). Both mistrust the people, and therefore deprive them of their arms." -- Aristotle, Book V, 350 B.C.E
The one where people worship him.
No matter what you have to give up just to get asses in the seats? That's the same thing as saying 'make your money any way you can. No matter how many heads you got to blow off to get your money, just get money and lots of it!
I carry a gun because I can't carry a cop on my back!
Maybe they picked the wrong Pope!
I carry a gun because I can't carry a cop on my back!
The laity doesn't pick the Pope, the cardinals do.
But you may be right. I think many of the cardinals are having second thoughts, to put it mildly...
This Pope is shaking things up.
"That tyranny has all the vices both of democracy and oligarchy is evident. As of oligarchy so of tyranny, the end is wealth; (for by wealth only can the tyrant maintain either his guard or his luxury). Both mistrust the people, and therefore deprive them of their arms." -- Aristotle, Book V, 350 B.C.E
lagcsocialist, you are such an extreme dick head. You don't even believe in Christianity, so anything you advocate as being 'GOOD' for a church just simply isn't going to be. And yes, I agree. This is bullshit. I have never been a fan of the catholic church, but I have always respected them for trying to stand by unpopular beliefs in these times. Fuck em if they abandon the WORLD OF GOD.....
Of coarse lagcsocialist has that definition of a successful church. Because he doesn't believe. Like most fake socialists, in the end he is all and only about money, so the def of a successful church is how many paying people they bring in. NOT whether they are spreading the word of GOD or not.
God help this site. I too go increasingly towards not coming because I have to spend so goddamned much time reading shit that so offends me.
"What sick, barbaric bastards.
It's one thing to use terrorism to make a political statement, but the wanton mutilation and suffering of innocents? How does that forward your political goals? When done in the name of religion, how does that earn you brownie points with God?
Fuck religious extremism. And especially fuck the "religion of peace." "
So, lagcsocialist supports terrorism AS LONG AS ITS FOR POLITICAL ENDS....
How many churches do you know that still preach human slavery is okay? I mean, it says its okay right there in the Bible!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Bible_and_slavery
But the church had to "re-interpret" those verses differently, didn't they? Why do you suppose that is?
Is not the Bible the inspired word of God? Why did the church "cave" and give in to those filthy liberals of the day who believed that everyone should be equal?
How many members do you think a church could keep if it interpreted everything in the Bible literally?
"That tyranny has all the vices both of democracy and oligarchy is evident. As of oligarchy so of tyranny, the end is wealth; (for by wealth only can the tyrant maintain either his guard or his luxury). Both mistrust the people, and therefore deprive them of their arms." -- Aristotle, Book V, 350 B.C.E
Where's the bible or the links to it in your post? All I see is a wikipedia page, which I don't consider to be my bible.
Christ brought the new law. We don't live by the old law anymore.
Here, I'll quote your bible to illustrate this:Slavery in the New Testament
In several Pauline epistles, and the First Epistle of Peter, slaves are admonished to obey their masters, as to the Lord, and not to men;[83][84][85][86][87] however Masters were told to serve their slaves "in the same way"[88] and "even better" as "brothers",[89] to not threaten them as God is their Master as well.
The Epistle to Philemon has become an important text in regard to slavery; it was used by pro-slavery advocates as well as by abolitionists.[20][90] In the epistle, Paul writes that he is returning Onesimus, a fugitive slave, back to his master Philemon; however, Paul also entreats Philemon to regard Onesimus, who he says he views as a son, not as a slave but as a beloved brother in Christ. Philemon is requested to treat Onesimus as he would treat Paul. [91]
The most we can get out the new testament is instructions on how to live a godly life within the institution of slavery. It doesn't support slavery as a just system.
We're also told to render unto Ceaser what is Ceaser's, yet that isn't seen as support for a system of taxation.
Why am I even trying to explain this shit to you.....?
"I'm fucking furious, I'm violently angry, and I like it. If you don't know what that feels like then I feel bad for you"
Ephesians 6:5-9: "Servants, be obedient to them that are your masters according to the flesh, with fear and trembling, in singleness of your heart, as unto Christ; Not with eyeservice, as menpleasers; but as the servants of Christ, doing the will of God from the heart; With good will doing service, as to the Lord, and not to men: Knowing that whatsoever good thing any man doeth, the same shall he receive of the Lord, whether he be bond or free. And, ye masters, do the same things unto them, forbearing threatening: knowing that your Master also is in heaven; neither is there respect of persons with him."
You can parse that any way you want, but the fact remains that until just 150 years ago, Christians used that verse and many others like it to justify slavery.
What changed? What caused Christians to interpret that verse differently all of a sudden?
Either the Bible is the literal word of God, written in stone, or interpretations change with the spirit of the times.
I'll take the latter, Alex.
"That tyranny has all the vices both of democracy and oligarchy is evident. As of oligarchy so of tyranny, the end is wealth; (for by wealth only can the tyrant maintain either his guard or his luxury). Both mistrust the people, and therefore deprive them of their arms." -- Aristotle, Book V, 350 B.C.E
And you, you dumb little marxist, use the socialist manifestos to justify enslaving everyone to each other.
No enemy of America would have ever been killed if they didn't show up to be killed. HDR
looks like they went to far the other extreme. They went from an ex nazi to a hippy dippy pot smoking fag. Seems to be the standard for our times.
Whatever happened to the Pope being infallible?
IMHO, This new Pope ain't shit compared to JPII!
I carry a gun because I can't carry a cop on my back!
I was "Catholic" when I was a kid. Later I realized my mistake.
I'm curious by what moral standard you're condemning slavery.
You know, to be honest with you, I think if everyone followed your lead and had a personal relationship with God instead of belonging to an organized church, a lot of the world's problems would be solved overnight.
I'm not saying ALL of them would, but quite a few. Organized religion (or more specifically: "holy" proclamations and fatwas and the like from religious leaders) are a big part of what's wrong with the world today.
If only everyone practiced their religion in solitude and followed their own path, instead of having some self-proclaimed "spiritual leader" tell them what to think.
"That tyranny has all the vices both of democracy and oligarchy is evident. As of oligarchy so of tyranny, the end is wealth; (for by wealth only can the tyrant maintain either his guard or his luxury). Both mistrust the people, and therefore deprive them of their arms." -- Aristotle, Book V, 350 B.C.E
An organized church is a requirement of Christianity, like wise Christians are required to meet up on a regular basis for the purposes of education, instruction, encouragement and correction. Followers of Christ have been called the body of Christ since the beginning, you can no more divide them into individuals and have the church then you can hack off all pieces of your body and still live.
You really don't have the faintest idea what it is that you hate so.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks