Today on Blogcritics
Home » Culture and Society » Spirituality » The Truth about Excommunication from the Catholic Church

The Truth about Excommunication from the Catholic Church

Please Share...Tweet about this on Twitter0Share on Facebook1Share on Google+0Share on LinkedIn0Pin on Pinterest0Share on TumblrShare on StumbleUpon0Share on Reddit0Email this to someone

Because 23% of Americans claim to be Catholic, it should be made crystal clear what excommunication actually is. Some look at excommunication as a thorny punishment from the Catholic Church. It actually is a medicinal penalty that is compulsory to help the sinner repent and turn back to God.

The Church fervently hopes that the former Catholic changes their ways, and  returns to “communion” with the rest of the Church. Unfortunately, the 2008 US elections showed a true differentiation.

The mind-boggling part was that fully 54% of American Catholics voted for the party that espoused abortion, euthanasia, embryonic stem cell research, and same-sex marriage. Cloning during this administration seems a likely probability too.

The items in the above paragraph are the five “non-negotiables” that exist for any Catholic. A “non-negotiable” is an intrinsic evil every time – that is, an act to which evil is essential or inherent, such that no exceptions exist.

Voting for the Democrats was voting for a new heath care system that would have abortions take place as health care. Their vote included embryonic stem cell research (ESCR) – but not adult stem cell research (ASCR). ESCR has produced tumors in experimental animals, and for human research it requires the death of a young human being. 

Only one candidate advocated using amniotic, umbilical, and “pluripotent” stem cells, which do not involve killing a young person. And she was only a vice-presidential option.

For Catholics, all issues do not have equal weight, and abortion and euthanasia are at the very top of the priority list – no issue is higher. Therefore, any Catholic voting for a candidate who endorses most (or all, in this case) of the non-negotiables is de facto excommunicated by their own actions from the Catholic Church.

When confronted with this idea, some alleged Catholics become obstinate, agitated at the Church, and even more obtuse in their thinking. Other Catholics understand that this is a method the Church uses to pull them back into the Faith. Understanding this, they will start believing what a true Catholic actually believes.

For the last 100 years every pope has also condemned socialism, which seems to be rearing its head in the Obama administration. Every "non-negotiable" including abortion, euthanasia, same-sex marriage, embryonic stem cell research, and possibly cloning is part of every socialistic proposal of this administration.The main reason Catholicism is not compatible with socialism is that socialism ultimately denies the central truth of Catholicism: that man needs God. Per the five Catholic “non-negotiables,” no Catholic can support this administration no matter how Catholic-friendly it may sound.

Excommunication exists to bring lapsed Catholics back into the faith. In 1996, Bishop Bruskewitz forbade Catholics of the Diocese of Lincoln (Nebraska) from membership in twelve dissident groups: Planned Parenthood, Society of Saint Pius X, Hemlock Society, Call to Action, Call to Action Nebraska, Saint Michael the Archangel Chapel, Freemasons, Job’s Daughters, DeMolay, Eastern Star, Rainbow Girls, and Catholics for a Free Choice.   

"Contumacious persistence in such membership for one month following the interdict on the part of any such Catholics will by that very fact cause them to be excommunicated," said the order. And when Catholics would not comply for one month, they were automatically excommunicated. The Vatican would not rescind the excommunication even after an appeal. 

Pope Benedict himself discussed excommunication for those espousing abortion on his flight to Brazil on 5/9/07. A reporter broke the ice by asking him if he supported the excommunication of Mexican legislators who had voted to legalize abortion. The Pope replied, “Yes, this excommunication was not something arbitrary, but is foreseen by Canon Law…[CCL 915]."

Catholics are all-inclusive, but 46% in the last election demonstrated that variances in faith are not common to Catholicism. The fifty-plus bishops who stood up for the Faith should be truly praised. For them, automatic excommunication was not an option. 

Imagine the surprise of half of the alleged Catholics in the US when they realize they have been automatically excommunicated, because they do not believe as the Church does.

So exactly what religion are they?

Powered by

About Kevin Roeten

Orthodox Catholic, with scientific background.
  • http://www.morethings.com Al Barger

    This article is CRAP!!! The author appears to think that words have meaning and ideas have consequences that have to be followed through. I am Deeply Indignant that someone would think that a Catholic has to believe in anything in particular. I think I should be able to be a Catholic without having to believe in the Resurrection or anything it says in the Bible.

    The author should quit being such a bigot.

  • Baronius

    Canon Law #915 applies to those who are “obstinately persevering in manifest grave sin”. I don’t think that applies to someone who votes once for a pro-choice candidate. If you vote for a pro-choicer because of his stand on abortion, then yes, that’s serious. But if you vote in spite of his position, because of some other concerns which outweigh it, and you seek to mitigate the impact of that position through petition or activism, that could be OK.

    When would such a vote be acceptable? Maybe when a corrupt pro-life candidate is running against an honest pro-choice candidate for State Treasurer. I don’t see how a Catholic could justify a vote for President Obama, though.

  • http://ruvysroost.blogspot.com Ruvy

    Aw, come on, Al. You may have studied theology and all that, but all this guy Kevin wants is for Catholics to act as they say they should act. It’s kinda like asking a Jew to keep kosher and keep the Sabbath.

    Now, the Catholics do have a mechanism to kick Catholics out of their church (I wish we had something like that), and they do use it from time to time. It’s called “consequences”, Al, for not walking whatever crooked line the Vatican deems to be the straight and narrow.

    Now, it’s not for me to argue with Catholics over their religion – it is their religion after all, and they are welcome to it. Catholics can come on here and blow their own horns on why they think their daughters getting an abortion should not bar them (the daughters, that is) from Mass or Communion. It’s none of my damned business. But don’t get mad at poor Kevin here. He’s having enough trouble distinguishing betweeen the effects of estrogen on men and how it is that men are homosexual and not heterosexual.

    Give the poor guy a break!

  • Kevin

    Al–Sorry, you want to be Catholic? You have to believe in certain things.

  • Kevin

    Baronius–You don’t know how many so-called Catholics make that same mistake. The highest priority issue is abortion, with euthanasia a close second. The pope even reiterated that. And, if you vote for a party that espouses all five non-negotiables, I won’t say what you’re in for at the end of your life.

    That’s between you and your Maker.

  • Kevin

    Ruvy–I’m kind of surprised you would even comment on this, not being a Catholic and all. And it seems as if you didn’t even read the definition of excommunication either.

    By the way, can you think of what might happen to your soul after physical death?

  • http://ruvysroost.blogspot.com Ruvy

    I’m not all that worried about the definition of excommunication, Kevin. It ain’t my problem. But my reason for commenting was to do you a favor and point out what you really want to do – get Catholics to act the way they say they should act and understand that there are consequences for not doing so. I’ve seen your problems clarifying issues elsewhere, and wanted to save you some trouble.

    As for your question, “can you think of what might happen to your soul after physical death?“, it is a matter that does concern me. Enough that I follow several blogs dealing with the issue, I’ve written an article on that very issue here at Blocritics Magazine, Life After Death; Scientific Evidence for Death as the Beginning of a New Stage of Life – Dr. Gerald Schroeder at the Israel Center, 1 July 2004, and if you are interested, can recommend you to a You Tube video dealing with just this topic by a man who died on the operating table and came back.

    Lemme know.

  • Kevin

    Ruvy–I would say that what you pointed out was pretty close to being right.

    Even though life after death ‘concerns’ you, do you really believe in it? If you do, then you must believe in a God. If you do, then it’s imperative you believe in the right one. If you do, then you would have to think the right God left us some kind of instructions on how to get to the proper afterlife.

    Better than what you said, I can recommend reading from several people who’ve been to heaven and hell, and back. I can recommend the right God, with the right instructions on how to get to the right afterlife.

    Are you game? Lemme know.

  • http://ruvysroost.blogspot.com Ruvy

    Kevin,

    Lose the sales pitch. It gets you nowhere with me.

    When the Redemption comes, non-Jews who can’t hack what is going on are going to be in a very difficult mental spot. Those of you who can comprehend what G-d wants of you will have an easier time than those who deny the Divinity altogether.

    I’m your elder brother in faith, Kevin. Remember that. If you survive the Redemption, your road will get closer to mine (provided I have survived as well – an assumption I do not make), not the other way round. The goal is not to convert you to be a Jew. The goal is for you to decide, on your own, that you love the L-rd with all your heart, all your might, and all your soul, and that you want to follow the Seven Laws of Noah – fully.

    That’s it.

    If you can hack the First Cut of Divine Judgment, you’ll get further instructions on how to proceed – or you will be guided on how to seek out those instructions.

    In the meantime, the Redemption hasn’t occurred yet; and you can argue about excommunication all you want with those to whom it matters.

    Just keep in mind what I’ve told you. The clock is ticking….

  • Baronius

    Kevin, you talk about “the” five non-negotiables. Certainly, the things you mentioned are intrinsically evil, but so are some other things like incest and genocide. It’s not like there’s a list of five issues upon which every vote must be decided. A person can acknowledge that without dismissing the gravity of supporting a pro-choice candidate.

    Additionally, I’m afraid that you may have muddled the issue by slipping a reference to the condemnation of socialism into the article. A pure atheistic socialism is alien to Catholicism, but the Church likewise condemns atheistic capitalism. A person may approve of President Obama’s social justice policies (I don’t) without supporting, say, cloning.

  • booniesboy

    Al:

    Re: “The author appears to think that words have meaning and ideas have consequences that have to be followed through.”

    “And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us.” (John 1:14)

    A life lived without meaning or consequences already has begun the hopelessness of hell. Meaning comes to fruition in the eternal consequences of spiritual sloth.

    Perhaps another worldly statement might be of interest:

    In the movie, “A Thin Red line’ a similar statement was made: ‘Tomorrow we may die; so let’s eat, drink and be merry today.’ The hero replied, “If tomorrow we die, then what we do today may be more important than we realize.”

    The horror of free will, unchecked by moral certitude, is that it can condemn us. God respects our free will so much that we can choose to be parted from Him forever.

  • http://drdreadful.blogspot.com Dr Dreadful

    Kevin @ #4, Booniesboy @ #11:

    Sarcasm detectors for sale here! Going cheap! Made in China!

    …oy vey…

  • DM Reed

    Al is obviously being sarcastic; he agrees with the author. Why is that not blatently obvious to everyone else?

  • http://drdreadful.blogspot.com Dr Dreadful

    I don’t know, DM, but I’ve had no takers for the sarcasm detectors.

    Think I’ll put ‘em on eBay…

  • Baronius

    I assumed that Al was being sarcastic, as well. But I’ve heard similar statements made in all sincerity.

    Dread, be careful. If a person’s bad enough at deciphering context, he might try to purchase one.

  • Kevin

    Boon–More power to you. I have that same quote by JOHN on a t-shirt that I wear all the time. I think I need to see a Thin Red Line now.

    Ruvy–If you thought that was a sales pitch your not out in left field, you’re off the field.

    It’s very difficult for me to believe that being a non-Jew is a problem. Christ was a Jew, for heaven’s sake. He’s not now.

    It sounds as if you believe in an antiquated faith now. The redemption has already occurred, unless you’re willing to tell 200,000,000 Christian Americans that they’re somehow deluded.

    If you’re so convinced you’re right, someone or something convinced you. How do you know they’re right?

    Maybe you forget that Jesus actually expanded on the laws that Moses had. That He was the only one who actually said He was God and proved it.

    The clock might be ticking for you, but not for God. Time is a non-existant dimension with Him. He already knows your eternal outcome. But you don’t. Obviously…

  • Kevin

    Baronius–Incest and genocide may be evil most of the time. But they don’t fit the ‘intrinsic’ label.

    We’re talking FIVE intrinsic non-negotiable evils here. With abortion being at the TOP of the list, NO ONE should support a candidate who espouses five non-negatiables.

    Condemnation of socialism is right up the correct alley. Because of socialism, you’re voting for 5 non-negotiables.

    Anyone approving of Obama’s social policies has no idea what “priorities” are.

    You didn’t vote for Obama, did you?

  • Baronius

    Kevin – I’ve never heard that there are Five Intrinsic Evils. I want to see a reference on that. In opposition to the idea, let me site a passage from Veritatis Splendor. It’s a bit long, but it’s so on-point that I can’t resist:

    Reason attests that there are objects of the human act which are by their nature “incapable of being ordered” to God, because they radically contradict the good of the person made in his image. These are the acts which, in the Church’s moral tradition, have been termed “intrinsically evil” (intrinsece malum): they are such always and per se, in other words, on account of their very object, and quite apart from the ulterior intentions of the one acting and the circumstances….The Second Vatican Council itself, in discussing the respect due to the human person, gives a number of examples of such acts: “Whatever is hostile to life itself, such as any kind of homicide, genocide, abortion, euthanasia and voluntary suicide; whatever violates the integrity of the human person, such as mutilation, physical and mental torture and attempts to coerce the spirit; whatever is offensive to human dignity, such as subhuman living conditions, arbitrary imprisonment, deportation, slavery, prostitution and trafficking in women and children; degrading conditions of work which treat labourers as mere instruments of profit, and not as free responsible persons”.

  • Glenn Contrarian

    WAITAMINNIT!

    Kevin, did you just say that genocide, while evil most of the time, is not intrinsically evil? Please explain how genocide is not intrinsically evil.

    That’s one thing I like about the Church of Christ of which I am a member – if someone does something evil, which includes pretty much all felonies and many misdemeanors (including simple adultery), they’re expelled from the Church. Of course they can return and are not prevented from doing so.

    Now why should the Church be so strict? “Expel the wicked from among you”, the Bible tells us. Jesus said, “How can you say you love me, yet do not do what I say?” That should be the standard.

    On abortion – we inside the Church do not support it. However, we do NOT judge those who DO support it. Why? Apostle Paul said that he judges those inside the Church, but not those outside the Church.

    So to Kevin – do you stand outside bars keeping pregnant women from drinking alcohol? Ever seen what happens when a child has fetal alcohol syndrome? I do – one of my Foster children has it, and he costs the taxpayers a quarter million dollars a year.

    If you say you’re against abortion because killing children is so evil, IF you are so very PRO-life because life is indeed so precious, then you should also be patrolling against pregnant women who drink or do drugs, and you should be especially against ANY kind of war. AND you should be absolutely FOR strict gun control. AND you should be absolutely against the death penalty.

    Need I go on? Dude – if one compares His words to political doctrines, then Jesus was most certainly a liberal.

  • Glenn Contrarian

    Ruvy –

    Since we’re talking about the value of life here, why is Israel restricting access by Palestinians to WATER?

    It can’t be because there’s not enough water to go around, because:

    “In an interview with CNN, Amnesty researcher Donatella Rovera said a drive through the Palestinian West Bank shows the striking disparity in water use, with “Israeli settlements with vast, green, well-irrigated farms and swimming pools and right next to them, Palestinian villages which are absolutely parched.””

  • Clavos

    Doc,

    The problem with your sarcasm detectors is they’re Chinese made.

    They work fine in Chinese, but can’t understand English, Brit, or ‘Strine, though the Taiwanese customers do seem to be satisfied with ‘em.

  • Glenn Dallaire

    Given all the press on the issue of Abortion and the teaching of the Catholic Church, we can assume that most every Catholic knows that abortion is a serious evil which constitutes a mortal sin, and because of this should never be supported.

    And, given that abortion is a life and death issue, it obviously takes precedence over all other issues, such as the economy, social security, healthcare reform etc…

    A Catholic who votes for a candidate such as Obama who has a public voting record 100 percent in favor of abortion automatically excommunicates him/herself in light of Canons 1398, 1364 and 751, which addresses automatic excommunication for those procuring or promoting abortion and also excommunication for those who deny a formal teaching of the Church.

    The exception would be if one was ignorant of the Catholic Churches teaching on the matter, but it would be almost impossible for a Catholic to claim that they are ignorant of the Church teaching against abotion, given all the news coverage on this topic over the past 3 decades.

    Glenn Dallaire
    -Webmaster of the St Gemma Galgani and St Paul of the Cross websites

  • Glenn Contrarian

    Glenn Dallaire –

    So, um, what’s the pro-life RCC’s stand on capital punishment? It makes sense that if one must be excommunicated for voting for a pro-choice candidate, one must also be excommunicated for voting for a pro-death-penalty candidate. After all, life is life, whether inside the womb or out.

  • Baronius

    Dallaire – Like you, I can’t conceive of a situation in which an issue would take precedence over abortion at the presidential level. However, I don’t believe that Canon 1398 would apply to those who vote for a pro-choice candidate, but only to those who directly procure or assist in an abortion.

  • Baronius

    I did some looking around online, and apparently the idea of Five Non-Negotiables stems from the Voter’s Guides published by Catholic Answers. But Karl Keating, the founder of Catholic Answers, says the following: In brief: Our voter’s guide mentions only five non-negotiable issues because that’s how many such issues are “up for grabs” nowadays.

  • http://drdreadful.blogspot.com Dr Dreadful

    Have to agree with Baronius here. It’s a considerable stretch to say that a Catholic who votes for a pro-choice candidate is ‘promoting’ abortion.

  • zingzing

    kevin: “Incest and genocide may be evil most of the time. But they don’t fit the ‘intrinsic’ label.”

    wha? i can’t think of any reason why not. abortion, on the other hand, is, in some cases, obviously NOT “intrinsically evil.”

    “Condemnation of socialism is right up the correct alley. Because of socialism, you’re voting for 5 non-negotiables.”

    what are these 5 non-negotiables? oh, wait, i looked it up myself. homosexual marriage is “intrinsically EVIL?” dear god. catholics SUUUUUCK. and i love how the church continues their attacks on science, even after a thousand years. catholicism is pretty fucking evil itself. but i still don’t understand how socialism automatically means stem cell research, cloning, euthanasia, gay marriage and abortion. explain your logical leap there.

    “Anyone approving of Obama’s social policies has no idea what “priorities” are.”

    that is utterly meaningless, and probably false. they just don’t have your priorities, which, let’s face it, are pretty fucked up, it seems.

    go drink some estrogen and lighten up. it must suck to be stuck in your head.

  • Ruvy

    Glenn,

    I don’t want to take away from Kevin’s little ex-communication playground here, now that he’s likely to have so much fun, so let’s just say that all the whining by Amnesty International and its Arab sponsors and handlers on CNN about weater disparities in Israel is just so much bullshit.

  • Irene Wagner
  • Irene Wagner

    All joking aside, Kevin…The Almighty is not wringing his hands over the outcome of US elections, and He might actually REQUIRE or INSPIRE some of the most “in-tune” faithful to vote for candidates who’d be considered immoral by just about anybody’s standards.

    God sets kings in place, good and bad, for reasons of His own. That means, if God wants an immoral person in office in a country where the leaders are elected, but a majority of the voters are God-fearing, He might accomplish His will by directing those who are most willing to take spiritual risks (because they’ve learned to recognize “the voice of the Shepherd”) to vote for those who might not be the “Papal Picks.”

    And if he doesn’t get enough God-fearing voters to vote amiss, remember, Rocks and Stones, (Luke 19:40) and Voting Machines will say whatever God wants them to.

  • Irene Wagner

    12 a.m. Looks like I have the last word.

  • http://www.EurocriticsMagazine.com Christopher Rose

    As far as I am concerned, stem cell research, cloning, euthanasia, gay marriage and abortion are all very good things and it is people that oppose them that are intrinsically evil and busybodies. Evil busybodies in fact!

  • Baronius

    Zing, Kevin kind of misrepresents the Catholic position. That’s why I questioned him – not because I’m a closet Obama supporter, as I’m sure you know.

    There are a lot of things that are intrinsically evil. I listed a few of them in an earlier comment. That was a quote from a papal encyclical, which was in turn quoting a Council, and there aren’t many things more official than that combination.

    I also noted that he’s wrong to merge non-atheistic socialist policies with intrinsic evil.

    Lest anyone think that I’m getting soft, let me give a real-world illustration of the issues involved. What if the 2008 GOP primary had been between McCain and Giuliani? Arguably, the greatest impact the president has on the availability of abortion is through his judicial nominations. I would trust a President Giuliani more than a President McCain to nominate strict constructionists to the courts. There’s a case where I’d be more likely to vote for a pro-choicer, specifically to move the country in a pro-life direction.

    This is why the Church rarely makes pronouncements about who to support. They state the issues then trust the voters’ prudence.

  • zingzing

    well, baronius, i was more responding to the “5 non-negotiables” that the catholic church published. that they hate on homosexuals and still continue their fight against science is just ridiculous. no wonder religion continues to wither away…

    kevin, it seems to me, lives in a completely different world.

  • Kevin

    Baronius–Get your facts straight. I aid five “non-negotiables”, not five intrinsic evils.

    There are many evils in this world. If you want to know what the 5 non-negotiables, just look them up on the internet. You will see many references and articles to them.

    Keep in mind, every evil has a priority. The Second Vatican Council unfortunately did not prioritize their evils.

  • Baronius

    Zing, it’s not fair to say that The Catholic Church published those; an organization called Catholic Answers did, in a voters’ guide.

    Homosexuality isn’t a sin. The Church has never taught that. Homosexual acts, or any sexual acts outside of marriage, are sinful. That may sound like parsing (in its modern, negative sense), but it’s not.

    You say that the Church is anti-science, presumably because of the stands against cloning and fetal stem cell research. But that’s not simply anti-science, is it? It’s not like the Church is protesting math or chemistry. Most everyone has at least paused over the moral implications of designer children and organ harvesting. A church would have to be pretty lame to not consider taking a position on these issues of life and death.

  • Kevin

    Glen–There are many different types of genocide. All the abortions since Roe are a type of genocide.

    You are absolutely incorrect about not judging abortion by someone else as wrong. One cannot judge what someone else’s eternal outcome will be. That’s up to God alone. But one can judge an action to be right or wrong.

    Drinking alcohol may be bad, or it may n0ot be. It depends upon whether you are doing something bad to someone else or yourself. But it still is lower priority than abortion which snuffs out a life before they even have the chance to get fetal alcohol syndrome.

    Drinking or doing drugs is not as serious as abortion. War, or just war, is sometimes necessary to make things right. God aided many in war, especially in the Old Testament.

    Gun control has nothing to do with killing, unless you use a gun for killing. And you can be against the death penalty when it is not involving the possibility of others being killed, but for it when others may be killed if it is not done.

    Glen, you’d better understand that all issues are NOT equal. The sooner you understand that, the closer you will get to God.

  • Kevin

    Baronius–Yes, it applies to apro-choice candidate. Especially if he espouses all the other non-negotiables.

  • zingzing

    kevin: “Glen, you’d better understand that all issues are NOT equal. The sooner you understand that, the closer you will get to God.”

    or relativity.

    “There are many different types of genocide.”

    such as?

  • Kevin

    Ruvy–I guess you didn’t like the facts I statred about Jews…

  • Kevin

    Irene–The Almighty never wrings His hands. God has never had an immoral person in office. Please don’t insinuate that you think you know what God wants…

  • zingzing

    baronius: “Zing, it’s not fair to say that The Catholic Church published those; an organization called Catholic Answers did, in a voters’ guide.”

    fair enough.

    “You say that the Church is anti-science, presumably because of the stands against cloning and fetal stem cell research. Most everyone has at least paused over the moral implications of designer children and organ harvesting.”

    true, if that’s the only things that could be accomplished using these technologies.

    that said, i do pause at fetal stem cell research, but the fact is that we can accomplish just as much using adult stem cells. probably. maybe. i think that’s the path we should go down first, but who knows… fetal stem cells also need not be harvested by killing babies. and if research shows that fetal cells can produce better or different breakthroughs, i say harvest away, as long as you do it the right way. by closing the door on fetal stem cell research, the church does humanity a disfavor.

    cloning also has its pros and cons. no, i don’t think we should be making artificial humans. but there’s a lot going on in the research that doesn’t necessarily lead to that. so keep the door open.

  • Kevin

    Baronius–Unfortunately, you are wrong about Catholics again. The 5 non-negotiables included those socialistic policies that were intrinsic evils.

    I guess you’re not Catholic, and have very little knowledge of what it means to be Catholic…

  • Ruvy

    Ruvy–I guess you didn’t like the facts I stated about Jews….

    What facts did you state about Jews, Kevin? More to the point, what facts do you even know about Jews?

    Stick to Catholicism, Kevin. There you’re on relatively safe ground, arguing only with Catholics, former Catholics, and the occasional conservative Protestant believer who knows her Christian Bible. Judaism is a land mine for a guy like you, Kevin. Jewish culture is even more of a land mine….

  • zingzing

    “The Almighty never wrings His hands. God has never had an immoral person in office. Please don’t insinuate that you think you know what God wants…”

    hypocrisy, thy name is KEVIN.

    “The 5 non-negotiables included those socialistic policies that were intrinsic evils.”

    where?

  • Kevin

    Zing–The Catholic Church does NOT hate homosexuals. Who ever taught you that fallacy?

  • zingzing

    come on, kevin. “love the sinner hate the sin” is just a cover up. if the catholic church has nothing against them, why won’t it let them live their life in happiness, however they choose to live it?

    what ever happened to “judge not?”

  • Kevin

    Ruvy–Maybe you misunderstand about Catholics and Judaism. Judaism was our HISTORY for over 2000 years. But you don’t believe in Catholicism, but you don’t state the reason…

  • Kevin

    Zing–How do you kjnow it’s a “cover up”? Did your niece tell you that? Homosexuals can live any way they please. Telling them what is right and wrong in no way constitutes control.

  • Baronius

    Kevin, like I said, I traced these back to a voters’ guide published by Catholic Answers. There’s even a reference to it in Wikipedia’s “Catholic Answers” entry, which points out that there are more than five. I can’t find this idea supported in any more authoritative source, and I’ve looked over the Vatican website, the Catholic Encyclopedia, the Catechism of the Catholic Church, and a couple of other sources of reasonable authority.

    Even the internal logic of this list is questionable. If killing of an unborn person is non-negotiable, isn’t infanticide equally non-negotiable? Why would gay marriage make the list, but not homosexual acts themselves? And the listing of cloning, which obviously wasn’t an issue for the first 1930-plus years of Church history, reveals this to be an ad-hoc formulation. Not your work, but no more definitive than most online lists.

  • zingzing

    “How do you kjnow it’s a “cover up”? Did your niece tell you that?”

    eh? my niece? what is that supposed to mean? and by cover up, i mean it’s a bit of rhetoric that lets christians get away with this bullshit.

    “Homosexuals can live any way they please. Telling them what is right and wrong in no way constitutes control.”

    damn right. so stop trying to legislate. that’s control.

  • Kevin

    Zing–what control does legislation take when it only protects what is already in the law. Get your facts right.

  • Ruvy

    Judaism was our HISTORY for over 2000 years.

    Google up Christian anti-Semitism – or Christian Jew-hatred. That was YOUR history for 2,000 years too. In fact, that is what makes you the wonderful folks you are, and why people like me want as little to do with Catholicism (or other branches of Christianity) as we can manage.

    Jews have loooong memories, Kevin. That is the first lesson you need to learn about us.

  • zingzing

    yeah, right, kevin. how’d it get into law? magic? nope, legislation. the law should be struck down. doma is pure evil. religious balderdash. obviously unconstitutional. bigotry. hypocrisy. it denies rights to people.

    you should go look up british law concerning catholics during the reformation and in the years following.

  • Baronius

    “I guess you’re not Catholic, and have very little knowledge of what it means to be Catholic…”

    Kevin, that’s neither an accurate guess nor one likely to win over an opponent. As you read theology, you’ll find that many disputes revolve not around a particular teaching, but the reasoning behind it, the authority with which it is taught, or whether it constitutes a theological development. It’s not wise to assume that just because a person disagree with you, it’s because he’s disagreeing with the teachings of the Church. Recall that Scotus and Aquinas butted heads quite a bit, but both are honored by the Church.

  • Ruvy

    The second lesson is that you can’t get away with garbage like Judaism was our history for 2,000 years. Your ancestors did not sacrifice at Solomon’s Temple, fight the Egyptians in Josiah’s army, suffer in sieges in Jerusalem or rebuild a destroyed city under the rule of Nehemiah or Ezra. You didn’t fight the Syrian Greeks for your freedom, like a minority of Jews did, or try to lose that freedom and become Greeks, like a majority of Jews in Judea did.

    Before some long-nosed Roman savages shoe-horned their way into Jewish history, the history of your people was braining babies against rocks if they were deformed, worshiping trees or stars, and generally being European savages – or savage Europeans.

    Truth and honesty is the second lesson you need to learn if you want to even deal with us.

    Now, like I said earlier – lose the sales pitch. There is nothing Christianity has to offer any Jew – worshiping your dead brother-in-law, and pretending you’re eating his body and blood is a piss poor way to treat family.

  • zingzing

    kevin, have you ever heard of zarathustra? he is fairly well responsible for an old persian religion (starting during the 5th century bce or so,) known as zoroastrianism. bits of this religion made their way into roman mythology. the main text is known as the zend avesta, which details some of the following:

    ahura mazada is the god of good. his evil twin, ahriman, was banished from heaven to hell, and is seen as the god of evil. humans will be judged according to the book of life, in which all deeds are recorded. there is a priesthood, named the magi (recognize them?) who absolve seen, and give out atonement and repentance. mithra, born on 12/25, was sent down by ahura mazda to redeem the earth.

    as of the 1st century ce, mithraism was a widespread cult in the roman empire. strange, isn’t it? so many so-called “pagan” ideas made their way into the new testament. christianity is nothing but a conflation of older ideas, myths, etc. if one were to say that it’s simply a combination of zoroastrianism and judaism, that would be simplifying things a little much, but it’s fairly close to the mark.

    persia, of course, was located in (and around) modern-day iran.

  • Ruvy

    …an old persian religion (starting during the 5th century bce or so,) known as zoroastrianism. bits of this religion made their way into roman mythology. the main text is known as the zend avesta…

    You mean you knew more about Zarathustra and Zoroastrianism than “Also Sprach Zarathustra?” I’m impressed, zing. Lose some of that snarkiness, and we could actually have an intelligent conversation, and it could range over things that go far beyond Brooklyn….

  • http://delibernation.com/blog/3 Silas Kain

    Roman Catholicism, thanks to the foundations laid by Saul of Taursus is no more than a precursor to the models used by multi-level marketing companies like Amway, Koscot and Shaklee. Only with the ROman Church one may “buy” their way into Heaven in a variety of “good works” a/k/a cash.

    Jesus was a champion of the poor. The Roman Church is not. Jesus preached love and respect, the Roman Church supports coercive conversion. Benedict XVI is the last of his breed. The next, according to St. Malachy, shall be the last. And the Roman Church, as we know it will be no more. That’s one prophecy I pray comes to pass.

  • http://drdreadful.blogspot.com Dr Dreadful

    christianity is nothing but a conflation of older ideas, myths, etc. if one were to say that it’s simply a combination of zoroastrianism and judaism, that would be simplifying things a little much, but it’s fairly close to the mark.

    It’s actually simplifying things quite a bit, since it omits the absolute core of the religion: Jesus Christ and his death and resurrection. But then, if we are to be completely honest, that wasn’t exactly a new idea either…

  • STM

    Kevin: “And you can be against the death penalty when it is not involving the possibility of others being killed, but for it when others may be killed if it is not done”.

    Now I know you’re just making this up as you go along. What is this? The Gospel according to Kevin??

    Despite saying it is permitted in cases of extreme gravity, it has a rider on it and you know it. And today the Church is opposed to the death penalty. Period.

    And the second part of your comment is a bit of a red herring.

    If someone’s caught and being tried and likely to get life if convicted, then they’re not likely to be out and about killing people. Therefore the death penalty in that case serves no purpose. That fulfills the requirement in the Catechism of the Catholic Church that other means are preferred over the death penalty even in cases of extreme gravity.

    But, like I say, in reality the Church is absolutely opposed to the death penalty in any way, shape or form. It is also committed in the US and worldwide to the abolition of capital punishment.

    You need to do some more reading on the subject.

    You simply can’t be a practising Catholic and be an open supporter of the death penalty above other forms of punishment that would suffice – like life imprisonment.

    The best-case scenario for Kevin: He can quietly believe in it and hope no one finds out.

    But the truth is in the 21st century: the notion of doing violence in an eye for an eye fashion does not constitute any part of Christian belief.

  • zingzing

    doc: “It’s actually simplifying things quite a bit, since it omits the absolute core of the religion: Jesus Christ and his death and resurrection. But then, if we are to be completely honest, that wasn’t exactly a new idea either…”

    well, there is the “sent down by god” thing, the dec 25th thing, the judge thing, the son (of) god thing, the “living spirit” (“spirit in the flesh?”) thing, the savior thing, etc, etc, etc.

    religion borrows here and there (much like christians “borrow here and there” from the bible) from older religions. it picks and it chooses. the similarities between zoroastrianism and christianity are remarkable, but you can find these things in other places as well. there are elements of z that don’t make it into c, and elements of c that seem contradictory to z, elements of c that come from x, etc, etc.

    it’s all a crap shoot based on what elements of z survived when they entered the roman empire. i guess it’s less of a case that z and judaism formed the basis of christianity than it is roman culture’s version of z and judaism and whatever the hell else was around… basically, people just make this shit up as they go.

  • http://delibernation.com/blog/3 Silas Kain

    Again, what I fail to fathom, is how a basic tenet of Christianity is that Jesus Christ came in fulfillment of the Scriptures. If that is the case, then does it not stand to reason that the Old Testament or Torah is no longer applicable? Did Jesus negate the old and usher in the new? Doesn’t that mean that Christians, while sharing a common history with the Jews, must view Judaism as a somewhat pagan religion? I’m not being disrespectful or inflammatory. I was taught that Jesus by virtue of His Resurrection, fulfilled the Scriptures thereby giving us all a new communion with the Almighty.

  • Baronius

    Silas, not pagan, but incomplete.

  • Irene Wagner

    #41. Hitler. Germany. State Churches. Two of Them.

  • zingzing

    “Hence today I believe that I am acting in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator: by defending myself against the Jew, I am fighting for the work of the Lord.”

    ( Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf, Ralph Mannheim, ed., New York: Mariner Books, 1999, p. 65. )

    “I am now as before a Catholic and will always remain so.”

    ( Adolf Hitler, from John Toland [Pulitzer Prize winner], Adolf Hitler, New York: Anchor Publishing, 1992, p. 507. )

    “The anti-Semitism of the new [Christian Social] movement was based on religious ideas instead of racial knowledge.”

    ( Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf, Ralph Mannheim, ed., New York: Mariner Books, 1999, p. 119. )

    lala.

  • http://drdreadful.blogspot.com Dr Dreadful

    what control does legislation take when it only protects what is already in the law.

    Kevin, why does there need to be a law to protect what’s already a law? That makes no sense whatsoever.

  • http://www.maskedmoviesnobs.com El Bicho

    “That makes no sense whatsoever.”

    I am seeing a pattern in Kevin’s comments

  • STM

    Irene and zing,

    That might have been the belief and interpretation of hitler and his mongrel hordes, along with the other fascists of Europe, but it means diddly squat as an argument.

    No Christian in their right mind would have supported any of them.

    Which means either a) those who did weren’t in their right minds or b) weren’t actually Christians. You can’t just say you’re a Christian by birth. You either are or you aren’t. Worship isn’t the yardstick either. It’s how you practise your faith.

    I suspect a small bit of the former and a lot of the latter.

    The Nazis banned in 1938 all religious processions.

    And nuns, priests and members of religious orders from all over Europe were among those sent to their deaths in the Nazi death camps.

  • zingzing

    stm, i understand that. religion was, like any other thing, something hitler wanted to dominate once he controlled germany. but a lot of that shit was written before he came into power. this is how he rationalized his thought. and that’s what’s important about it. the motherfucker thought god was behind him.

  • STM

    Zing: “the motherfucker thought god was behind him.”

    Nah, he knew he was all bullsh.t on that score. There wasn’t a bone in his body that had any room for godly belief.

  • Baronius

    Zing, one of the interesting things about Christianity is how unlike Zoroastrianism it is. Every once in a while people have tried to bridge the differences, and they’ve never been accepted. The Church’s response to the Manicheans, Cathars, Albigensians, and a few others was to immediately label them heretics, and combat them theologically and militarily. Some of the Church’s biggest guns, like St. Augustine and St. Dominic, dedicated their lives to overthrowing these heresies.

    Heresies are like transvestites. From a distance, they look like what they’re pretending to be. But as you get closer, you recognize those little outward differences, and closer, you realize that they are signs of a fundamental unlikeness.

    These pseudo-Zoroastrian dualists aren’t just a little off-base, and they’re not opposed by Christianity as rivals. They’re fought as heresies. They inevitably lead to screwy teachings like the rejection of matter, the equation of the Old Testament God with the devil, and the denial of the Incarnation.

  • Baronius

    The claim about Mithraism is also shaky. We don’t know a lot about what they believed – that’s always a problem with mystery cults. They left behind some art, which helps. Mithra is most commonly depicted:

    1) being born from the rock
    2) fighting a bull
    3) ascending into Heaven

    Just like Jesus! (Except for the rock and the bull.)

    Sarcasm aside, I’ve seen attempts to merge those first two with the accounts of Jesus, and they’re not persuasive. You’ve got to make some pretty big assumptions to make Mithraism similar to Christianity.

  • http://www.EurocriticsMagazine.com Christopher Rose

    I don’t need to make any assumptions at all to make Zoroastrianism or Mithraism similar to Christianity, Islam or Judaism!

  • Baronius

    You do need to, to make them uniquely similar. If you want to say that they’re all faiths, you can toss them in the same bag as Mormonism, Bahai, and Norse mythology if you want to. But that won’t get you closer to proving the argument upthread that Christianity is derived from them.

  • http://www.EurocriticsMagazine.com Christopher Rose

    “Uniquely similar”? I can’t get my head round that concept. Can you explain what you mean by it?

    I don’t see any point in tracing the evolution of faiths personally; it might be of some philosophical or cultural anthropological academic interest to some people though.

  • Baronius

    “Uniquely similar”. Yeah, that’s a seeming paradox. But what I meant by it is pretty straightforward. If you’re trying to show that my grandfather and I are related, you can point to the fact that we both have noses and lungs. We’re similar. But that’s not going to convince many people. You need to demonstrate that we’re similar in specific ways in which other people aren’t similar; say, a distinct genetic marker.

    Likewise, if you want to demonstrate that Christianity is an amalgam of previously-existing religions, particularly Zoroastrianism and Mithraism, you should do more than assert that they all have gods and priests. That doesn’t distinguish them from other religions. You need to demonstrate similarities between them that are unique to only them.

    I realize that you’re not trying to make that argument, Chris, nor was Kevin. (This thread has covered a lot of topics.) Some people did seem to propose that argument, and I was trying to point out its weakness to them.

  • http://www.EurocriticsMagazine.com Christopher Rose

    Gotcha, Baronius, thanks for the clarification.

  • zingzing

    stm: “Nah, he knew he was all bullsh.t on that score. There wasn’t a bone in his body that had any room for godly belief.”

    horseshit. there was an obsession with god.

  • zingzing

    baronius: “Just like Jesus! (Except for the rock and the bull.)”

    and those weren’t in the roman version. funny, that.

    “You’ve got to make some pretty big assumptions to make Mithraism similar to Christianity.”

    and you’ve got to put some pretty big blinders on to not see it.

    “Likewise, if you want to demonstrate that Christianity is an amalgam of previously-existing religions, particularly Zoroastrianism and Mithraism, you should do more than assert that they all have gods and priests. That doesn’t distinguish them from other religions. You need to demonstrate similarities between them that are unique to only them.”

    good god. that’s not even what i said. first, mithraism is a part of zoroastrinaism. next, i said that christianity seemed to build upon roman mithraism (the cult which survived into the roman empire) and judaism, both of which were around in the empire at the time and place when christianity began to spread. the similarities are remarkable and unique: dec 25th, the spirit made flesh, god sending down a redeemer, etc, etc. all the things i listed up there.

    this isn’t nose and lungs at all. this is “you have the same hair, the same eyes, the same laugh.” it’s absolutely ridiculous that someone can’t see the similarities. it’s like childishly closing your eyes to pretend the monsters can’t see you.

    AND my other point was that religions are ALL amalgamations of each other. they all have similarities. in fact, islam and christianity are close enough that if you caught them in bed, you’d have them arrested. same with judaism. they’re all the same fucking thing.

    “These pseudo-Zoroastrian dualists aren’t just a little off-base, and they’re not opposed by Christianity as rivals. They’re fought as heresies.”

    seems like they’re on the right track then. christianity is a hoax. can’t think of anything more heretical to say, but it doesn’t really matter anyway.

  • doug m

    Not really clear how anyone could argue people are related just because they share body parts. A person’s grandfather could be a bat with that reasoning.

    And of course newer religions took from older ones. I am guessing Baronius enjoys Fistful of Dollars and doesn’t see the unique similarities in Yojimbo.

  • Baronius

    Zing, your comparison between Mithraism and Christianity was largely contained in comment #57. I think this is a fair representation of the points you made:

    1 two gods, good and evil
    2 evil god banished from Heaven
    3 humans judged by Book of Life
    4 priesthood
    5 savior
    6 sent from Heaven
    7 December 25th

    The first and last points really don’t apply to Christianity. (I mean, who believes that Jesus was born on December 25th?) The second and fourth points are nearly universal in religion. I can’t find any references online to the third point applying to Mithraism.

    Was Mithra a savior? He had a heroic quest, to kill a bull. Jesus offered himself as a sacrifice for sin. If that seems like a connection to you, so be it.

    I’ll grant you point #6.

  • zingzing

    alright, well, if you want to have seven points (i’m sure there are more, but we’ll leave those alone for now), i’ll talk about seven points.

    1/2: the fight of good against evil is nearly universal in religion, that is true, but it’s the story of how points one and two occur that strike me as similar. a good god and his most beloved have a falling out, the other is banished to hell, where he rules as the representation of evil. that’s pretty similar.

    3: the “book of life” is referred to several times in the new testament (particularly in revelation), and it is mentioned here.

    4: the magi perform the exact same function as christian priests, while in many other religions before and after, the “priests” were kept far more distant from the regular folk. christian priesthood is, if not modeled on, at least eerily similar to that in z.

    5/6/7: mithra was sent to “redeem the earth” from heaven by god on 12/25, as the “living spirit.” if you don’t see the similarity, i don’t know what to say. and while no one really thinks he was born on dec 25th, the notion came from somewhere. now where was that?

    i think you’re being a little disingenuous here, b. i will admit that you could probably do this for several other religions (that being finding several points of similarity to christianity and claiming that they are connected), but that’s kind of my point. christians will look at z and claim it is a bunch of pagan hogwash, but that their (remarkably similar) beliefs is the true word of god.

    nonsense. the bible is a book that brings together bunches of myths and stories from the past, rewrites them into a (somewhat) cohesive whole, and passes itself off as the “word of god.”

    this, however, is probably the best argument for the “truths” found in the bible. these stories had to come from somewhere, and so many religions, disparate though they may be, claim the same stories as true.

    the bible is nothing but the latest update of this material. it’s like a modern retelling of hans christian anderson stories.

  • Baronius

    Zing, to me, points one and two shoot down the whole theory. There is nothing more fundamental to Judaism, Christianity, and Islam than monotheism. Some people may consider Christianity as tritheist, although it certainly has opposed this idea. But two gods? Not at all. Some students of comparative religion try to depict Mithra as the son in a trinity, but that would leave the Holy Spirit as Satan. It just doesn’t fit. Anyway, gods exiling other gods is too common to be a “genetic marker”.

    With regard to point three: I realize that the Book of Life is referred to in the Bible. I just have been unable to find a reference to it in Mithraism.

    Priests are always a separate class of people who offer sacrifice for sin. That’s the definition of religion. It’s true for Hindus, Druids, Jews, everyone but Protestants and Muslims.

    5: As I said, I don’t see any connection between Mithra’s heroic act and Christianity. Marduk and Gilgamesh were both heroic warriors who killed great beasts – that’s a motif that was common in the Middle East. But Jesus offered himself as a sacrifice.

    7: You refer to the notion that Jesus was born on December 25th. That’s simply the day that his birth is commemorated. There were a lot of pagan traditions around that time, the winter solstice (or equinox or something…I’m too lazy to look it up), and I’m sure the date was chosen to elbow other religions out of the way. But it wasn’t derived from them.

  • zingzing

    alright, so there are two beings known as gods in z. in christianity, satan does have some god-like powers. they are seen as sides of a coin. and the story is what’s important here. it’s like a damn outline for an essay.

    as for the book of life, it’s definitely mentioned in z, and may or may not be in m. remember, m is to z as jesus is to christianity.

    “Priests are always a separate class of people who offer sacrifice for sin. That’s the definition of religion.”

    no it isn’t. and the thing i’m talking about is the certain lack of separation between the people and the priests. that lack of separation is rather peculiar for the time.

    “As I said, I don’t see any connection between Mithra’s heroic act and Christianity.”

    well, that’s latching on to a certain point in the story, but ignoring the whole. all of the other similarities are overwhelmingly on point, but you seem to ignore them. why?

    “I’m sure the date was chosen to elbow other religions out of the way. But it wasn’t derived from them.”

    um. yeah, if they chose the date to do just that… how is that not derivation? that’s kind of my point in a nutshell. christianity does nothing but absorb older ideas and wrap them up in a pretty, new package.

  • Irene Wagner

    STM – what you stated in #69 was true. What Kevin stated in #41 was not.

  • STM

    Zing: “horseshit. there was an obsession with god”

    Bollocks zing. What he said to get the German people onside (and all his public statements on this come from works of propaganda) and what he actually believed – which can only be judged by his actions – were two different things.

    There’s no belief in God that involves cold-bloodedly murdering people en masse.

    Sorry zing, you’re wrong.

    Hitler knew exactly what he was doing and none of it involved God. In fact he was known privately to be profoundly anti-Christian.

    Saying one thing in public to keep the masses on side doesn’t translate to it being the truth.

    In fact all he perpetrated was one of the more gross lies ever inflicted on the pages history. Perhaps the worst.

    The Nazis DID believe in the occult, though.

  • zingzing

    you claim to know the mind of hitler?

    i only quote him. he said what he said.

    the things he did certainly weren’t christian. unfortunately, a lot of things christians do aren’t christian.

    “In fact he was known privately to be profoundly anti-Christian.”

    care to back that up?

    “Saying one thing in public to keep the masses on side doesn’t translate to it being the truth.”

    those quotes were (2 out of 3 anyway) from well before he was in charge of any “masses.” he was sitting in a cell. he may have had some political power, but it was only increased by what was in the book i quote.

    look, i dunno if you’re a christian or not. it doesn’t matter to me. but the idea that hitler didn’t use christian bs to fucking bulldoze the jews into a mass grave is bullshit. he used it. it’s in the damn nazi bible. whether he believed it or not, he used it. and people believed it. and what happened happened.

  • zingzing

    people try to pretend like the german people suddenly turned atheistic or something overnight. like some dark lord came over them and told them to stop believing thousands of years of christianity in order for them to kill off their nearest religious (jewish) neighbor.

    fucking bullshit.

    ask a jew. it was religious as well as racial. fuckers didn’t follow christ’s example, didn’t stop usury, therefore they must die. add some great depression to some depressed christianity, you get nazi germany and a holocaust. just like in the black plague, they picked the nearest target they could see, and that was the jew. wipe em out, christians.

  • STM

    No, I can’t look into the mind of Hit6ler although 20/20 hindsight’s a marvellous thing.

    But it’s well known that privately, he was anti-christian.

    Plus, what uou say doesn’t tally with what happened elsewhere.

    The French are Christians and never bought into the Nazi filfth, and neither did the British.

    It’s about Naziism period, zing. He had ‘em mesmerised and they believed him.

    Then when it all snowballed, even those who didn’t really believe it ended up doing his bidding too.

    It took a very courageous person to stand up in Nazi Germany and shout that stuff down.

    People did it and invariably paid with their own lives.

    Never mind BC being a cabal, Nazi Germany WAS run by a small sinister cabal.

    And what they believed in had nothing to do with God.

    You could believing what you want zing.

    Doesn’t mean it’s right.

  • STM

    … as usual

  • Jordan Richardson

    “Christianity is an invention of sick brains,” Adolf Hitler, December 13 1941

    “So it’s not opportune to hurl ourselves now into a struggle with the Churches. The best thing is to let Christianity die a natural death,” Adolf Hitler, October 14, 1941

    Then there’s “Table Talk,” the transcription of many of Hitler’s private conversations. That particular volume includes such gems as:

    “Christianity is a rebellion against natural law, a protest against nature. Taken to its logical extreme, Christianity would mean the systematic cultivation of the human failure.”

    Or this from Mein Kampf:

    “In its workings, even the religion of love is only the weak reflection of the will of its exalted founder; its significance, however, lies in the direction which it attempted to give to a universal human development of culture, ethics, and morality.”

    Hitler did what served his cause best. When he needed to appeal to German Christians, he did so, but there is absolutely no evidence to suggest that he himself was a Christian or that he supported them. He supported their power and knew he couldn’t pull “it” off without them.

    Hitler’s Nazism was more distinctly pagan than Christian. He spoke of “gods and goddesses” as much as he spoke of God or Christ.

    A Hitler Youth marching song, for instance, sounds out the following:

    We follow not Christ, but Horst Wessel,
    Away with incense and Holy Water,
    The Church can go hang for all we care,
    The Swastika brings salvation on Earth.

    Horst Wessel, by the way, was turned into a martyr by Goebbels.

    So there’s a whole whack of religious imagery the Nazis played with under Hitler.

    His Nazi government also banned teachers from participating in extracurricular religious instruction and tried to ban the crucifix at Oldenburg in ’36.

    Then there’s the fact that members of the SS were told explicitly to leave the Christian church. The SS was also known for performing their own pagan rituals for weddings and other ceremonies.

    Hitler abandoned any and all churches after he rose to power, too. Goebbels and Goering regularly attacked churches publicly, clergy were put in concentration camps, church property (including orphanages and schools) was shut down or destroyed, and so forth.

    Hitler was a “Christian” when it suited him.

  • Jordan Richardson

    but the idea that hitler didn’t use christian bs to fucking bulldoze the jews into a mass grave is bullshit. he used it. it’s in the damn nazi bible. whether he believed it or not, he used it. and people believed it. and what happened happened.

    Hitler used everything he could to create the situation, though. If Germany was a country that worshiped flying horse gods, he’d have used that.

  • STM

    Thanks Jordan. I thought most of that stuff was well known.

    Obviously not.

  • Jordan Richardson

    The pagans, atheists, Christians, etc. usually play hot potato with Hitler, but the facts pretty much leave him as an opportunist willing to do anything to support his worldview. Nothing more, nothing less.

  • http://ruvysroost.blogspot.com Ruvy

    zing,

    The book you need to look at to understand what was going on with the Nazis and those they got their inspiration from is The Occult Roots of Nazism: Secret Aryan Cults and Their Influence on Nazi Ideology by Nicholas Goodrick-Clarke.

    As Stan pointed out, Hitler, the politician, used his Catholicism to his advantage whenever it suited him. But in so far as his beliefs went, he had left Catholicism far behind.

    After all, would a Jew-hater like him actually be content to believe in a religion that worshiped one of the evil contaminants from the “Gegenrasse”, Jesus, son of Joseph – a filthy Jew?

  • Irene Wagner

    So Kevin in #41, Hitler came to power in spite of the fact that Germany had two state churches.

    There were Christians within both of those churches who opposed the policy of Nazism, sure, and many paid with their lives–but they did what they exactly because they chose to DISOBEY the recommendations of the State Churches.

    They used their consciences to act, as we should use them to vote.

    And when all is said and done in the voting box, the overarching pattern of political and economic trends we’d like to believe are the product of individual human choices really aren’t, whether you believe the Bible (Psalm 75:7, Daniel 4:35, Daniel 2:21), or chaos theory.

  • Irene Wagner

    More could be said about Mithra and how IT borrowed from Christianity post 2nd c. More could be said about
    Fr. Wilhelm Schmidt–a German Catholic priest who had to relocate to Switzerland when he ran afoul of the Nazis, and was later branded an anti-Semite to add insult to injury, probably because of his run-ins with Freud and his ideas about monotheism. The anthropological research Schmidt presented in the 12 volume “The Origin of the Idea of God,” supported the hypothesis that many “indigenous primitive peoples currently or had at some point worshiped a god-like omniscient figure, who bears a remarkable resemblance to the Christian concept of God…and that the primitive societies studied were, in fact, monotheists…”

    Zing, and Dr. D, I’m not troubled by any of the echoes of Christian theology I see in folk religions around the world, or in the ancient stories of Isis, et al. Some of them were corruptions of, others consistent with, prophetic truths about a Messiah that one finds in the Hebrew Prophets. Those of course, don’t trouble me, either.

    God has, in all ages and in all cultures, had something to say to those who honestly are looking for him.

    More could be said, but yeah, I should shut up and let God do the talking.

  • zingzing

    the goodrick-clarke book has been pretty well discredited, hasn’t it ruvy?

    and to stm, you’re certainly in a condescending mood today, aren’t you? i’d have to say you pretty easily dismiss the idea that hitler had some christian in him and are willing to believe any other ideas far too easily. it’s almost as if you’d defend christianity from him. i dunno that things are so simple. it’s true that he did use anything and everything that he could to gain power, including christianity. and that he was a madman. and obviously contradictory.

    but to ignore the fact that germany suddenly changed from a very, very christian nation into some sort of fanciful atheistic state is just too much.

  • zingzing

    irene–jesus replaced mithra, not the other way around. that’s why the idea spread at all… it was already there.

  • http://ruvysroost.blogspot.com Ruvy

    zing, who discredited the Goodrick-Clarke book? Where?

    That book explains very clearly why Germany appeared to suddenly change from a very, very “Christian” nation into some sort of fanciful atheistic state.

    The racial theories had been floating around for centuries in the German principalities, zing. But it was the isolation of Austrian Germans who suddenly were a minority in their own country that was the spark that got the secret Aryan cults going so strong. It was the defeat of the Austrians in 1866 by the Prussians that sparked the change in Austria from a centralized empire to the bi-furcated Austria-Hungary. It was the discovery by Austrian Germans that the minorities in the “Austrian Crownlands” not in Hungary were shoving them aside that gave judenhass – Jew-hatred the new name of “Anti-Semitism” in turn of the century Wien. It is no coincidence that Hitler was an Austrian; it was no coincidence that so long as the German Empire was a successful enterprise (1871-1917), ideas of Aryan superiority would be nothing but pleasant tales in Germany. When Germans went down to defeat in 1918, these ideas suddenly got more attractive. After the bankers in New York managed to wreck the stock market in 1929 and the Austrian banking system collapsed in 1931, it is no surprise that these ideas of racial superiority elbowed out the tired and corrupt fools who ran the rump republics in Germany and Austria.

    Try learning some history, zing.

  • zingzing

    actually, ruvy, i was asking a question. that’s what the question mark means. i was reading on this very subject not too long ago (i don’t recall where) and i am pretty sure i read that book is a bunch of hokum. but i could be wrong. i’m remembering it more for its title than the author, and there may be more than one book of similar title. so i could be wrong. basically, the book takes individual sentiments and reads them as being far more important than they truly are, from what i remember.

    and i do know all about the various reasons why anti-semitism was so strong in germany and austria (and other parts of europe) following ww1, the depression, etc.

  • Imagine Whirled Peas

    Wow there is a lot of white hot hatred towards catholics in this thread! Impressive. I’m sure Catholics would be eager respond if they haven’t already been hearing this type of pointless ignorant repetitive heretical nonsense for centuries.

    But I have to address the commenter who uses ye olde “derivative” argument to explain the nature of religion: one religion derives from another, etc. No offense but this is laughable for various reasons. If we break the argument down philosophically, the premise is that ideas are like snowballs rolling down a snowy hill. As it rolls it becomes bigger and changes size yet the kernal of the original ball is still inside. One religion creates other religions and the logical conclusion is generally they’re all the same. Philosophically, this obviously introduces some major problems if you believe in the pluralism of truth as opposed to believing in a concentrated or singular truth (such as science or materialism). But mainly the “derivative” argument is a retrofitted sine qua non throwback that unabashedly shouts: “[i]f I didn’t know about mountains I would never know about snow, and if I didn’t know about snow I would never know about ideas, and if I didn’t know about ideas I would never know about religion.”

    Hilarious. Those posts made my day.

  • zingzing

    “One religion creates other religions and the logical conclusion is generally they’re all the same.”

    but that’s not the point of the line of questioning at all. no one’s trying to say they’re all the same.

  • http://ruvysroost.blogspot.com Ruvy

    that’s not the point of the line of questioning at all. no one’s trying to say they’re all the same.

    Actually, the two ungrateful daughter religions of Judaism, Christianity and Islam, resemble the mommy faith quite a bit. A cursory reading of a Catholic Bible reveals wholesale lifting of Jewish concepts, which are then (mis)placed in the Cathiolic religion to serve its own purposes. Th Qur’an similarly tracks with Judaism of the 7th Century. The big differences between the two is the interpretation that Arab culture places on Jewish Law, and it is here that the bloodlust of Arabs is displayed, as opposed to the basic humaneness of Jews. While four different death penalties are prescribed in the Torah, the actual practice of the Sanhedrins (the courts) in Judea was to allow the convicted murderer to escape the country beyond its borders – and thus beyond the jurisdiction of a Jewish court. One single subsidiary Sanhedrin of 23 members that actually ordered and carried out the execution someone in ancient Judea was considered a “court with blood on its hands”.

    The novel, The Physician, by Noah Gordon, about a English Christian who wants to get the best medical traiing available in the year 1000 or so, and goes to Isfahan to study at the hospital where Avicenna teaches, reveals the general nature of how Arabs (and Persians) turn basic Jewish humane precepts into butchery. The protagonist, as a medical student with the Shah’s backing, has to go to places where executions are carried out, and fix the arms of those who have had their hands chopped off for robbery, for example. Modern Persia is not a whole lot different.

    Actions speak louder than words.

    For all these differences, when you set the three Abrahamic religions together and compare them to Indic religions, like Hinduism or Buddhism, you see just how alike the three Abrahamic religions are, especially with respect to the idea of G-d. So much so that everybody’s favorite atheist at Blogcritics, Chris Rose, calls them all a cruel fraud.

    Wow, there is a lot of white hot hatred towards catholics in this thread! Impressive.

    Stop whining.

    Christianity generally, and Catholicism in particular, have both earned the contempt we Jews have for them. Leaving aside the ideas of blood sacrifice of humans and ritual cannibalism inherent in both, which merely make them philosophically disgusting to a believing Jew, there are the real actions of the Christians (and Catholics in particular) in their persecution of Jews in their power. There were the Crusades – which killed Jews in every town that drunken Christian “soldiers” and “knights” could find on their bloody route to “liberate” Israel from the Muslims. There was the Inquisition, which attempted to keep Christianity “pure” and tortured Jews at the hands of a Jewish apostate, Toerquemada, a campaign that went on for hundreds of years. Before all of this even, there was the unsystematic but steady genocide of Jews in the Land of Israel by Christians – which is the reason Jews are found all over the world – having fled the knife and bloody hand of the kneelers at the cross.

    Finally, there is the holocaust of Jews by the Nazis in Europe 70 years ago, a vewry systematic genocide, carried out by Nazis, but approved by the vast majority of Christians in Europe, and now, today, the delegitimization of Israel by European Jew-haters – a delegitimization that is highlighted in America by the “blessed of Hussein”, that stinking bastard, Obama. And let us never forget that Obama is a good Christian.

    You Christians have earned Jews’ contempt the old fashioned way – by working for it. And you deserve what you have worked so hard to get.

    Have a blessed Sunday, and regards from Samaria – ISRAEL

  • zingzing

    judaism is as much hokum as the rest of it. it’s as much a product of older stories as christianity is.

    and the vast majority of christians in europe fought against the nazis.

    and israel is a creation of the west which has done nothing but undermine the security of that part of the world. it is legitimate, but its creation (as a modern state) was a terrible mistake. (i’d hope you can see what i really mean with that. so don’t go off on some rampage.)

  • zingzing

    of course christianity, judaism and islam resemble each other. they’re all based on the same thing. (makes one wonder why they fight so much.) THE POINT is that none of them is true. they’re all just made-up mumbo jumbo. combinations of what each would consider “pagan” sources, a little bit of dogma, some name changes, etc, etc. it’s amazing what people will believe if you put their immortal soul on the line.

    if you believe one of them, what makes the other ones wrong? what made you decide that?

    it’s bullshit. there’s no big man in the sky, there’s no heaven or hell, there’s nothing to pray to. you’re just wasting your time.

    and even if there was, all that is asked (rightly) is that you lead a good life. you live like you’re a goddamn slave to god. you have to this now, and that then, and if you do it in the wrong order, it’s all meaningless and you have to start again. for fuck’s sake. no real god worth worshiping would ask you to make yourself his fucking fool. just be a good person, help people out and what do you have to worry for? if you are good and god exists, he’ll reward you. if he’s some son of a bitch who would punish you for the slightest lack of faith, who gives a fuck? you’re screwed anyway.

    religious people. instead of going to church, go feed the homeless or something. go plant a damn tree. do something useful. instead of reading the same damn scripture every night, go read a book that might actually educate you in some way. go learn something new. enrich yourself. there’s enough ignorance in the world.

    religion is a fucking curse.

  • Baronius

    Irene – I’ve seen that kind of thing argued elsewhere, with regard to polytheism. The usual view is that early civilizations were polytheist, and monotheism developed over time. Some anthropologists believe the opposite, that in certain cases polytheism developed from contact between monotheistic tribes.

    Your people worship the one god Aldu, the raven. Mine worship the one god Hoodoo. Our tribes go to war, and you destroy us. A hundred years later, that battle is retold as the story of the Raven God banishing Hoodoo from heaven. If you’d left behind a village of my people rather than wiping us out, you’d be telling the story of the Raven God, king of all gods. My people would tell the same story, but quietly amongst ourselves we’d tell about the Final Day when the trickster Hoodoo will reconquer heaven.

  • http://ruvysroost.blogspot.com Ruvy

    religion is a fucking curse.

    zing, have you been drinking some of Chris Rose’s Koolaid? The only ways I could tell the comment was yours and not his was that the spelling was American and you didn’t capitlize anything.

  • zingzing

    i’ve always been anti-religion. but 6 am after 4 hours of trying and failing to sleep makes one especially cranky, i guess.

  • http://ruvysroost.blogspot.com Ruvy

    It’s 6 in the morning in New York? I just turned around to look at the three clock set I have on top of the breakfront, and lo and behold, it’s 6:45!

    6 am after 4 hours of trying and failing to sleep makes one especially cranky, i guess.

    Yeah, I know how that feels. Thing is, these days, I’m not used to pulling all nighters like I used to 40 years ago. So, I would have fallen asleep (unless I was worrying about money – a frequent occurrence over the last 6 months).

  • zingzing

    no, no. it was 6 am when i wrote the comment. it’s 5:30 now… daylight savings started (ended?) this morning. halloween celebrations going on like mad all around me. but i was exhausted after a 6-hour long concert. not that it mattered to my neighbors.

  • http://ruvysroost.blogspot.com Ruvy

    I’m tired, too, zing – so I read the time wrong in New York. I haven’t moved the clocks back to Standard Time for New York or St. Paul, yet. I got back from police patrol a little while ago. As usual, the interesting stuff all happened when I was done with my shift….

  • Kevin

    Ruvy–It’s too bad you’ve been indoctrinated the way you have. You have stated so many falsehoods, misperceptions, and outright lies about Catholicism in particular, and Christians in general, that it’s completely mindboggling.

    I wonder why you haven’t stated anything about how the Jews believe that over 200 million American Christians are actually dilusional about the true Faith.

    Because you’re info about the Crusades and the Inquisitions 90% wrong, I’ll give you a chance to get them right. My personal e-mail is listed at the end of the column. Use it! Don’t continue to hide behind the facade of multi numbers of people who don’t believe in God–and you know who they are.

    Heck, even Irene has been spouting lies about many of my posts. One in particular is how God has chosen His leaders. There have been over 250 popes since Peter was the first, and even though there was 2-3 who did immoral things, all were still infallible in regards to morals and faith.

    How much everyone is ignorant of the Catholic Faith is astounding. If you really know the Faith speak out. If you are just an outsider, we are amazed at just how misinformed you really are…

  • Deano

    2 or 3?

    I think you need to crack open some books on the history of the Papacy…

    There have been popes that fathered children out of wedlock, others that have married, gambled, turned the Lanteran Palace into a brothel, poisoned opponents, engaged in political assassination, sold the papacy to the highest bidder, waged war, engaged in nepotism, theft, orgies, sold indulgencies for ready cash, approved the use of torture, repressed scientific knowledge and once put a predecessor’s corpse on trial.

    Infallible?..not so much.

  • Kevin

    Deano–It’s fine to make accusations, but it’s easy to do when you’ve heard some rumors from someone. Who exactly was it you heard these things from? Did they know where they came from? Did you read any books that told you these things, because you certainly weren’t there to witness these alleged acts?

    I believe I said all popes were infallible on issues of faith and morals. You did read that, didn’t you?? How about the definition of infallible. You know the right one, don’t you?

  • http://www.EurocriticsMagazine.com Christopher Rose

    Kevin, seeing a Catholic accuse a Jew of being indoctrinated is the funniest thing I’ve read today. You both are!

  • Deano

    Kevin, I’m not making accusations, all of the above can be found in any decent history of the papacy – backed up by copious historical documentation, much of it right out of the Vatican archives. It is historical fact, generally verified by multiple sources. And you are right, it is still a minority of Popes that have indulged in questionable behaviour, but it is considerably more than 2 or 3.

    And yes I am aware of the definition of infallible and I am also aware of how mallable that definition can be when you start applying it to matters of faith because the infallibility is supposedly manifest im the Papacy from God, so that even the supposed “errors” of the papacy thus become part of God’s greater plan.

    So I gather God’s plan for the papacy has logically included murder, torture, surpression, adultery, rape, sodemy, theft, murder, incest and poison…

  • Baronius

    Deano, the apostle Peter was a jerk sometimes, and wrong sometimes, but any time he spoke as leader of the Church (after Pentecost, which is when the Church began) he spoke without error. That’s the claim of the popes. Not that they’re good guys – Kevin’s underestimating the number of lousy popes – but that they will never teach wrong.

    We don’t believe that God’s will is necessarily manifest in the Pope. It’s cool when it is, but we don’t bank on it. Remember that Dante depicted popes in Hell.

  • doug m

    Kevin, I am curious how you can call out Deano for believing a book to inform him of events he wasn’t around to witness yet you appear to believe things from a book about events you weren’t around to witness.

  • http://ruvysroost.blogspot.com Ruvy

    Ruvy–It’s too bad you’ve been indoctrinated the way you have. You have stated so many falsehoods, misperceptions, and outright lies about Catholicism in particular, and Christians in general, that it’s completely mindboggling.

    Kevin,

    My wife and I have a good friend in southern Minnesota (we lived in Minnesota prior to coming home to Israel). She used to be a non-observant Catholic who believed in abortion rights and most of the rest of the “liberal” stuff that conservative Catholics like you find detestable. She was married for the second time when I met her in the early ’80’s. Then one day, she discovered her faith, and returned to it.

    It broke up her marriage with her non-observant Catholic husband, and she met and married a conservative Catholic, and moved to southern Minnesota and had a bunch of babies with the guy. Her marriage has been anything but idyllic, but she home-schooled her kids, managed to live with a man who spent nearly every dime they had on stupid toys because her faith told her that divorce was wrong, and they have managed till this day. Her husband finally appears to have grown up – her faith paid off. And she – she will be buried in a nun’s habit. She told me why, but it’s something I forgot – maybe you know the reasons for that. You’re the Catholic, it’s something you might know.

    Now, she is the person who interested me in what she called “end-timey stuff”. She took me to people who had visions, and got me to understand that G-d’s prophecy is not restricted to Jews alone, and that G-d shows His miracles and shares His Vision with people in a way that they can understand.

    For all this, when I first confronted her with Christian Jew-hatred, she said, “but those people weren’t real Christians!”

    Put just a little differently, you guys appear to believe that if some Christian makes you look bad by his behavior, you will not take responsibility for his actions the way you expect Jews to for the behavior of other Jews. It took some pummeling to get her to comprehend that this responsibility stuff goes both ways.

    But she’s my friend, Kevin. I could afford to trust her with my life because when I was living on the streets, she was willing to help me.

    My perspective is simple. This also occurred near Christmas of 1982, at the home of another Catholic family, where I was staying for a month. I was looking at their Bible out of curiosity, and the little girl walked in, turned the page to a picture of Jesus and asked me if I believed in G-d. I pointed to the man in the picture and said, “I believe in G-d, not men”. This upset her, and she ran to her mom saying “Ruvy doesn’t believe in G-d!”

    From reading this Bible, I could see where Catholicism had lifted all sorts of Jewish concepts from us and (mis)used them in creating a faith with which to persecute Jews. That was not their only purpose, of course, but from where I was sitting, this was the purpose that was coming across loud and clear to me.

    Don’t continue to hide behind the facade of multi numbers of people who don’t believe in God–and you know who they are.

    Hide? Hide behind what, Kevin? Hide behind the history I know took place? Hide behind the Jew-hatred my own father taught me about that he suffered in Poland 90 years ago? Look up the term, “Hierusalyma est perdita” on Google and see what you find.

    You Catholics have an awful lot to answer for and saying that the folks who did the evil deeds weren’t real Christians, or some other dodge will get you nowhere. Kevin, I KNOW my history, and can toss a whole pile of heavy books at you – including your own.

  • Baronius

    I don’t think I’ve ever blamed an individual Jew for the behavior of other Jews, Ruvy. You’re blaming individual Catholics for the behavior of other Catholics, aren’t you?

  • http://ruvysroost.blogspot.com Ruvy

    I don’t think I’ve ever blamed an individual Jew for the behavior of other Jews, Ruvy. You’re blaming individual Catholics for the behavior of other Catholics, aren’t you?

    Baronius, you said in comments to this article, “we both agree that Christians’ treatment of Jews has at times been horrible.”

    I expect Kevin to admit to the same thing. I wouldn’t blame individual Catholics for what Catholics as a group did – unless they were part of that group.

  • http://drdreadful.blogspot.com Dr Dreadful

    Who exactly was it you heard these things from? Did they know where they came from? Did you read any books that told you these things, because you certainly weren’t there to witness these alleged acts?

    Kevin, you’re priceless. Why do you assume (that word again!) that you’re the only one who knows anything about what’s being discussed?

  • Baronius

    “I expect Kevin to admit to the same thing.”

    Ruvy, I don’t expect any such thing out of Kevin. You probably don’t either; I bet you’re just looking for a fight, and Kevin may well oblige. Seems kinda pointless, though.

  • zingzing

    kevin really is the best thing going around here right now. this is golden: “I wonder why you haven’t stated anything about how the Jews believe that over 200 million American Christians are actually dilusional about the true Faith.”

    ha! “dilusional?” look that one up, kevin. you know what you’ll find? absolutely nothing.

    why don’t you go disabuse a billion muslims of their delusions, kevin? what makes them wrong and you right?

  • Kevin

    Deano–You still haven’t told me your sources. And when have you ever been in the Vatican archives?

    You don’t even know what popes are infallible on and what they aren’t…

  • Kevin

    Doug–I guess you donm’t understand that I did not have to be there. I have witnessess to witnessess that were ther and can attest to the truth.

  • Kevin

    Ruvy–I really am not sure what point you’re trying to make. You might recall I didn’t say that I expected Jews to act ANY specific way. It’s just that they all think 300 million Americans are delusional about what they believe and you’ve proved it time after time.

    Now you KNOW a particular history took place? You still haven’t listed your sources. And you seem pretty touchy about Jewish hatred in the past. Still no source as to where that hatred came from. A true Catholic doesn’t hate people. Of course, you’re not Catholic so you wouldn’t know that.

    From what you’ve spouted, you don’t know your history at all. You talk about your sources, but never come up with one…

  • Kevin

    Ruvy–You discuss alleged Catholics in name only like they were part of my GROUP. There’s 62 million Catholics in the US right now. You can bet that many were automatically excommunicated for voting for Obama.

  • http://ruvysroost.blogspot.com Ruvy

    I wonder why you haven’t stated anything about how the Jews believe that over 200 million American Christians are actually dilusional about the true Faith.

    I missed this one entirely! My bad! Thanks for catching this, zing!

    Kevin,

    Just 200 million American Christians? Why not all the Christians world-wide, Kevin? Why should I be so discriminatory and single out only American Christians? I have more class than that.

    True Faith?

    Aw come on, Kevin, stop pullin’ my leg. I got past the “do you believe in Jesus?” crap years ago when I hung around the Jewish Defense League almost 40 years ago, paying a dollar a day for karate lessons. I didn’t take being a Jew seriously until the IDF kicked Arab ass (WITHOUT AMERICAN HELP, ZING) in 1967, and didn’t start to take the Jewish religion seriously until I couldn’t explain things like water-witches or prophets adequately. But I never took Christianity seriously.

    Look, Kevin. If you want to believe that some Jew was a god, that’s no skin off my nose. You can worship the guy all you want, and it will never bother me one bit. Just leave me and my people out of your delusions.

    It’s your problem. If you want to call that the “true faith”, knock yourself out. Have a ball. But I’m not part of your true faith, and that is the way I like it. And I moved here to Israel to make sure my kids wouldn’t be part of your delusions either, having been lured into some pretty slut’s bed or something (not that there aren’t Jewish sluts – there are). Finally, eating my 60th cousin for lunch every day, even just symbolically, makes me gag.

    Do we understand each other?

  • Deano

    Kevin,

    Are you dense, or just being willfully obtuse?

    There are countless well-researched, peer-reviewed historical studies on the Papacy. For starters why don’t you crack open Keepers of the Keys of Heaven by Roger Collins, which should hopefully shed some light upon your absolute manifest ignorance of history.

    I didn’t claim to have visited the Vatican archives, I noted that much of the material utilized by historians who have studied the history of the Papacy was derived directly from documents, letters and information from the Vatican archives. These have included Papal correspondence, inventories, accounts, diaries, drafts of bulls etc.

    Perhaps everyone should start draft their comments to you in words of two or less syllables, so you can comprehend it…

  • Kevin

    Zing–I like how you get off on one typo. That’s good.

    What makes Muslims wrong is that they consider women a second class. They think it’s acceptable to kill people who don’t believe as they do. They worship Muhammed who was anything but a god. Need I go on?

    I worship one who said He was God and PROVED it. The God that I worship was actually the biggest liar the world has ever known, or He was , in fact, GOD.

  • Baronius

    Kevin, I feel like I’m doing all the heavy lifting on this thread. I thought you and I were carrying the sofa, but when I look up, you’ve not only put your end down, you’re napping on the sofa.

    So step up. Provide chapter and verse for official Church teaching on the five non-negotiables, and tell me where in canon law a Catholic is excommunicated for voting for a pro-choice candidate. Or at least get off the sofa.

  • Kevin

    Ruvy–I could have brought up all the world’s Christians, but I thought we were Americans.

    If you never took Christianity seriously, that’s your problem. I go with the preponderence of the evidence. You seem to run on past emotions and hate. Not good.

    What counts in the end is what kind of afterlife we both have. I fear for yours.

    I sure hope you understand that…

  • Kevin

    Deano–I happen to believe that someone who is very anti-Catholic probably has a very biased opinion of prior papacies.

    Actually, you didn’t note that any of your material was derived from any Vatican information.

    Hey, and you’ve assumed what my actual comprehension is. That’s better than good!

  • zingzing

    “Zing–I like how you get off on one typo. That’s good.”

    i was standing over a bible at the time.

    “What makes Muslims wrong is that they consider women a second class. They think it’s acceptable to kill people who don’t believe as they do. They worship Muhammed who was anything but a god. Need I go on?”

    well, women are the root of all evil, aren’t they? and the christian treatment of women throughout history is nothing to crow about. and neither is the treatment of the non-believer. and muslims don’t worship muhammed as a god… allah is god. muhammed is a prophet.

    “I worship one who said He was God and PROVED it.”

    how’d he do that? i’d really like to see this proof. no joke. if he proved it, i’d have to eat my words.

    “The God that I worship was actually the biggest liar the world has ever known, or He was , in fact, GOD.”

    well, that’s true.

  • http://ruvysroost.blogspot.com Ruvy

    Sources, Kevin? You can’t be serious. Do you want me to list a third of the books in my bookcase?

    Try,

    Holy Hatred: Christianity, Antisemitism, and the Holocaust (Paperback);

    Christian Antisemitism: A History of Hate by William Nicholls (Paperback – May 28, 1993);

    Monsters & Madonnas: The Roots of Christian Anti-Semitism by Judith Taylor Gold and Joseph Gold (Paperback – Jun 1999)

    Roots of Christian Anti Semitism by Malcolm Hay (Paperback – Jun 1984);

    The teaching of contempt: Christian roots of anti-Semitism (McGraw-Hill paperbacks) by Jules Isaac (Paperback – 1965);

    Christian Beliefs and Anti-Semitism by Charles Y. Glock (Paperback – Jan 1, 1969);

    The roots of anti-semitism in christian theology by Constance B Gilder;

    The Romanian legionary movement: An Orthodox Christian assessment of anti-semitism (The Carl Beck papers in Russian and East European studies) by Alexander F. C Webster (1986);

    The Origins of Anti-Semitism: Attitudes toward Judaism in Pagan and Christian Antiquity by John G. Gager (Paperback – Feb 14, 1985)

    This is just a partial list of sources you can consult that I pulled from Amazon. They will verify the many sources of mine – the World Book Encyclopedia, the Encyclopedia Brittanica – Historians History of the World, Jews and Anti-Semitism, by Jean-Paul Sartre, the Source, by James Michener, biographies of David ben-Gurion, Golda Meir and others, innumerable history texts and the most important source of all – growing up Jewish in America.

  • http://ruvysroost.blogspot.com Ruvy

    I fear for my afterlife too, Kevin. But not because I missed the ephemera known as Christianity – that will disappear. I have bigger worries – like the guy in the mirror and what he is thinking – and the Guy Upstairs, and what He is Thinking.

    Oh, yeah, why don’t you help out Baronius here? He is a serious Catholic and his faith means something to him. Notice that he has no need to argue with someone like me? Pick up your half of the sofa and help the guy explain the ins and outs of why all these poor American Catholics just did themselves out of the “True Faith” will you?

  • Baronius

    “he has no need to argue with someone like me”

    Ruvy, I see no point in arguing with you, at least in trying to argue you out of Judaism. That’s different.

    Don’t get me wrong, I have a lot of hope for your conversion. But it won’t be the result of a shouting match on the internet.

  • Kevin

    Baronius–That’s really unfortunate about how you feel. I’m afraid your idea of “napping” was just business on my part.

    You might try Cannon 1331.1.2, or CCC 1463, or Canon 1314, or Canon 1364 or 1388, or 1398. Possibly even Canon 1323.

    You won’t see “pro-choice” in the Code of Cannon Law(CCC) but you will see a lot about abortion and euthanasia.

    The five non-negotiables comes directly from Cathoilic Answers, which is a synidicated magazine run by a slew of priests. Actually, there are many more non-negotiables than those five. But none with a higher priority than abortion or euthanasia. Just ask Pope Benedict.

    I don’t think I can get on the sofa. It looks like somebody has already beat me to it…

  • Kevin

    Zing–Ever hear of the Resurrection? How about the Bible?

  • Baronius

    Kevin, did you choose numbers at random? Canon 1463 reads:

    §1. Counterclaims cannot be proposed validly except within thirty days from the joinder of the issue.
    §2. They are to be adjudicated, however, along with the original action, that is, in the same grade with it unless it is necessary to adjudicate them separately or the judge considers it more opportune to do so.

    The Catholic Faith is beautiful, true, and good. You don’t have to distort it to make it appear worthwhile. I’m glad that at least you’re recognizing that there are more than 5 non-negotiables.

  • http://delibernation.com/blog/3 Silas Kain

    Papal infallibility? The Power of the Holy Spirit in conclave? I think not. The doctrine of Papal infallibility was instituted my men, therefore making the doctrine fallible. And, if there were such a thing as the “power” of the Holy Spirit, it certainly has not been a factor in the selection of many a Pope over 2,000 years. The reality check here, folks, is that the Roman curia maintained the central power of the Church within the confines of Italy. John Paul II upset the apple cart but was a “suitable” candidate for the establishment due to his archaic Catholic approach. Benedict XVI only delays the inevitable — another Reformation.

  • zingzing

    kevin: “Zing–Ever hear of the Resurrection? How about the Bible?”

    yep. what of it? i’m really not sure where you’re going with that line of questioning. is that your “proof?” if it is, that’s pretty flimsy. (it also makes god look like an indecisive, forgetful fool, but that’s neither here nor there.)

  • http://drdreadful.blogspot.com Dr Dreadful

    I’m getting the impression that even if you sat Kevin in front of a TV and showed him a video of Pope Benedict stating specifically that voting for Obama didn’t mean you were excommunicated, he’d still insist he was right.

    I’m saying nothing about the Roman Catholic faith either way, but Kevin’s living proof that blind, rigid adherence to dogma royally buggers up your logical faculties.

  • zingzing

    kevin’s logical faculties are in his ass? is that what i am to understand? his voice does seem to emanate from within.

  • Kevin

    Baronius–CCC 1463 was the Catholic Catechism. But I’m impressed. You actually had a copy of the Code of Canon Law with you.

    There might be more than 5 “non-negotiables” now, but one has to remember there ARE priorities, as Pope Benedict so stated several times.

  • Kevin

    Silas–I afraid you’rewrong on all counts. Papal infallibility was passed on to Peter directly by Christ. Every pope had it since then, because it was passed down to them by the Holy Spirit. It has been present for every papal indoctrination since Peter.

    Why is your faith so stunted? No matter what happens, the Catholic Church will always be around. Ever wonder why it took 1517 years for other Christian faiths to morph away?

  • http://drdreadful.blogspot.com Dr Dreadful

    Just spent an enjoyable few minutes looking up Kevin’s Canon Law references,

    1331.1.2 simply states that an excommunicated person cannot celebrate or receive the sacraments.
    1463 is as Baronius reports.
    1314 discusses the circumstances under which a canon ruling is to be ex post facto or not.
    1364 states that an apostate or a heretic is to be excommunicated.
    1388 is to do with the confidentiality of confession.
    1398 precribes excommunication for a person who ‘procures an abortion’.
    1323 lists circumstances under which a person may avoid punishment for a violation of the law.

    Of these articles, only one has anything to do with abortion. The rest appear to have been, as Baronius alleges, cited completely at random.

    Not impressed, Kev…

  • http://www.maskedmoviesnobs.com El Bicho

    “Not impressed, Kev…”

    Were you expecting to be after all he has already written? I am impressed you guys are still engaging him. Must have a lot of free time on your hands

  • http://drdreadful.blogspot.com Dr Dreadful

    Think of it as intellectual ibuprofen, El B. His lack of critical thinking skills is just too painful to ignore.

    Almost every comment of his contains at least one logical fallacy. It’s absolutely fascinating to watch.

  • http://delibernation.com/blog/3 Silas Kain

    Ah, Kevin, your rigid adherence to false impression is admirable. You, my poor lost misguided soul, are wrong. Papal infallibility is not even 200 years old. It has not been part of so called “indoctrination” since Peter. Further, the fact that Peter was first Pope means nothing as well. The fight between Pauline and Petrine Christians is well documented. The true “Catholic” Church, Kevin is comprised of more than Rome but Roman Catholics don’t seem to get that message. There are Eastern sects of Christianity which are older, wiser and less corrupt which walk the talk far more effectively than that which is espoused in Rome.

    Why is your faith so stunted?

    It isn’t, quite to the contrary. My teachers taught me to question every facet of Dogma, every word that was promulgated by Scripture. For it is not until one tests one’s faith that one comes to realize Ultimate Truth.

    No matter what happens, the Catholic Church will always be around.

    Think positive, my friend. I am comforted in my faith that your supposition will not stand the test of time.

    Ever wonder why it took 1517 years for other Christian faiths to morph away?

    Who morphed from what? That which made the Roman sect of Catholicism strong was corruption, greed, seduction of power and politics. Jesus Christ played very little in the operation of Rome during the Dark Ages and the Reformation. There are older and wiser Christian sects and I suggest that if your love of Christ is your ultimate motivation, you do your research. Knowledge is a powerful weapon, Kevin. And it does not come out of the Baltimore Catechism.

    … a Reading from the Book of Silas.

  • Glenn Contrarian

    Kevin –

    A few things to mull over:

    – In OT times, as far as I’ve been able to find, every single nation and culture from the Indus to the Pyrenees worshiped a trinity. Sometimes the ‘trinity’ was just a group of three allied gods, or was closely related, or was different forms of the same god (like the Hindu). All nations and cultures, that is…except the Hebrews. They alone were strictly monotheistic.

    – According to Herodotus, the priests of Baal would ensure that every night, a chaste woman was there in case Baal showed up. Her duty to be there for his pleasure, to play the part of a wife. The similarity to modern-day nuns is interesting.

    – According to the entry ‘Babylonia’ in the Catholic Encyclopedia (NOT the “New Catholic Encyclopedia”), which has the imprimatur of a cardinal and is available on newadvent.org, Baal was part of a ‘Trinity’.

    Put these facts together, Kevin. I’m sorry, and I know this angers you, but the above facts would indicate that the trinitarian god of mainstream ‘Christianity’ bears a closer resemblance to Baal than to the God of Abraham.

    And yes, I am very Christian.

  • zingzing

    ah, christianity–the garbage can of ancient religions.

  • Deano

    Kevin,

    You might want to sit down and study with some Jesuits. They would probably provide you with some critical skills at logical thinking, rhetoric and a sounder foundation for both your faith and the dogma you are currently parroting so badly. You are doing Catholicism as a whole a disservice.

    Lastly, I’ll note that disagreeing with your narrow, simplistic and lightweight view of the history of the papacy and the Catholic Church, is not tantamount to being anti-Catholic. Equating the two as you do in your comment just lends credence to the fact that you do not know much about the subject matter at hand.

  • http://thingsalongtheway.blogspot.com/ Cindy

    19- “Kevin, did you just say that genocide, while evil most of the time, is not intrinsically evil? Please explain how genocide is not intrinsically evil.”

    Well it’s apparently not evil all the time since the Catholic Church participated in genocide as late as the 1940s.

    Reference works such as “The Vatican’s Holocaust” by Avro Manhattan and “Convert or Die!” by Edmond Paris present the documented facts that the Catholic church liquidated over 700,000 orthodox Serbians in Croatia, Yugoslavia, during the years 1940-1945.

    Interesting viewing, that video I linked to, showing popes in cahoots with Mussolini, Hitler, no totalitarian terrorist genocidal dictator who’d give power to the church was bad enough for the good ol’ Catholic authorities.

    The Catholic Church puts authority between people and their god. Never ever let a human being come between you and your god, humans are atrociously blindly corrupted–many of them are/have been officials in the catholic church.

    Kevin, you seem to care a lot about the authority of human men. You sound nothing like a person who believes in Jesus.

  • http://delibernation.com/blog/3 Silas Kain

    Hallelujah, Cindy.

  • Glenn Contrarian

    Cindy –

    Not a whole lot of people know about the Balkan holocaust. Did you know that the OSS (the precursor to the CIA) informed their superiors that the guy who led the Ustase in their slaughter of the Serbians – Ante Pavelic – was hiding on Vatican property in Rome after the war? Despite having a warrant for his arrest on charges of genocide, the OSS was told to leave him be since he was on Vatican grounds.

  • http://ruvysroost.blogspot.com Ruvy

    -Incest and genocide may be evil most of the time. But they don’t fit the ‘intrinsic’ label.

    Wow! Another one I missed! I must have been tired looking at the comments here!

    Really, Kevin, you are not doing the Vatican any favors with your comments. And they look bad enough without you ruining their rep more.

    Kevin, at least I can see how the various genocides the Christian church participated in don’t really bother you that much.

    I’ll let you explain to the waiting multitudes here why aborting one foetus is intrinsic evil – while murdering off hundreds of people in a gas chamber or firing squad is not intrinsic evil. Or is the only authority you have the bloodied hands of the “church fathers”, Kevin, and their little law book?

    In your own lingo, these “church fathers” of yours are starting to look like Pharisees – who haven’t washed themselves off from the charnel-house of murder they’ve committed.

    Actually, in my lingo, they really look a lot more like the priests in Jerusalem who worshiped the rising sun in the Temple – by defecating in front of the Altar of G-d. Those stupid shits brought about the destruction of Jerusalem with their evil, and the “church fathers” you look up to with such saintly admiration will bring about the destruction of Rome.

    Heh! I may want to see Rome nuked because I’m a Jew who wants vengeance. But the sins the Vatican has committed over two millennia will get G-d – Who Has a far worse Temper than me – on their asses in a far meaner way.

    Looking at all this stuff, the first thing I would do if I were unfortunate enough to be a Catholic is to start shopping for another religion. I wouldn’t want to be associated with this scum if I could help it – feh!!

  • http://ruvysroost.blogspot.com Ruvy

    Deano,

    Kevin,

    You might want to sit down and study with some Jesuits. They would probably provide you with some critical skills at logical thinking, rhetoric and a sounder foundation for both your faith and the dogma you are currently parroting so badly. You are doing Catholicism as a whole a disservice.

    You just made something click for me, Deano. Shim’on Peres, the sitting president of Israel, is a murderer with a long string of bodies trailing him, including YitzHaq Rabin, Ofra Haza, and a whole bunch more. Shim’on Peres is also the ONLY Israeli politician to have benefited from a Jesuit education. I finally understand the value of an education given by the Society of Jesus. They teach you to wipe the stink of murder off your hands. And Shim’on Peres was a very good student.

  • Deano

    Oh I didn’t say it would make you nice, just that the Jesuits are very good at what they do…

  • http://ruvysroost.blogspot.com Ruvy

    You didn’t say they would make anyone nice, Deano. So true. They are not known as “logic-choppers” for nothing.

  • Baronius

    Back in the 1500’s, there was a young priest with the impossibly regal name of Caesar de Barono. Nice guy, smart, meticulous, morose (not a rare personality type). His spiritual advisor told him to focus his energy on Church history. At the time, Protestants were writing a lot of histories that distorted the Catholic Church. Baronius went to work, writing ecclesial histories that set a new standard for objectivity. He never “spun”.

    A few hundred years later, I started writing on the internet using his name, inspired by his ability to be objective in his analysis and passionately committed in his person.

    I’d be happy if the Pope told all Catholics to vote the same as me. I can’t imagine how a Catholic could vote for Obama without committing a mortal sin. But canon law doesn’t excommunicate a person for voting for a pro-choicer, so I’m obligated to correct Kevin.

  • zingzing

    “I can’t imagine how a Catholic could vote for Obama without committing a mortal sin.”

    it’s a mortal to sin to suggest that a person be put into office where he may or may not sign into legislation a bit of legalese that might make it easier for a woman to possibly have an abortion?

    that’s a lot of steps to take to commit a mortal sin. from your voting booth to the vote counter to the electoral college to the white house to the capitol to the floor to the house to the senate to the white house again, back to your state to the bedroom of another person to the nutusack of some man, out the penis, into the vagina, up the tubes into the egg, then at the doctors, crying in the bedroom, on the phone, to the bank, and, finally, at the hospital (or in a back alley, if christ has his way, and you remain “innocent”). long way to go.

    you must have to be very, very careful as a catholic. watch all your steps. never sure if you’ve damned your own soul to hell with any action you take. who actually knows the unintended consequences of every action? you’ve probably killed someone in cambodia because of the things you’ve done.

  • Baronius

    Zing, you actually hit on a very important phrase, unintended consequences. If a Catholic supports a pro-choice candidate because he’s pro-choice, thus intending to increase the number of abortions, it’s almost certainly a mortal sin. If a Catholic can justify supporting a pro-choice candidate despite that issue, and works to negate the impact of that vote with respect to abortion, he’s fine. But he’d need a solid reason to cast that vote.

    This is the nugget of truth in Kevin’s article. There really, really isn’t much about Obama that could offset his fundamentally anti-Catholic stand on human rights.

  • zingzing

    unless you’re voting for yourself, you’re always going to have differences with a candidate. you always vote based on not whom you agree with, but how much you agree with a person.

    “Obama[‘s…] fundamentally anti-Catholic stand on human rights.”

    that’s a pretty loaded phrase. i doubt he sees it that way. and i’d say that, on a fundamental level, the catholics and obama agree more than they disagree about “human rights.” but the catholic church does not really choose to see things in shades of gray. it’s all black and white, until it’s inside their walls, raping kids, of course.

  • Glenn Contrarian

    Baronius –

    I can’t imagine how a Catholic could vote for Obama without committing a mortal sin

    This is about abortion, right? In the Democrats’ health-care reform package, it says that NO federal funding will be used to fund abortions.

    Now compare that to the GOP health-care reform package just released yesterday. Not only does it NOT preclude denial of care due to ‘pre-existing conditions’ (which means my oldest son couldn’t get health care coverage), but it also includes NO federal mandate that the funding (whether federal or used in other ways to assist the poor to receive health care funding) cannot be used to fund abortions.

    The Democratic bill includes a safeguard (holely though it may be) against federal funds being used for abortions. The Republican bill does not.

    But YOU say you can’t see how it’s not a mortal sin to have voted for Obama.

    *shakes head in pity*

  • Baronius

    Zing, the Catholic Church see things grayer than Kevin does, less gray than you do. Probably as white, gray, and black as things really are. Seriously, how could anyone be a member of a religion that doesn’t take a stand on issues of life and death?

  • zingzing

    well, they view things through the values and shading of a 2,000 year old religion, which really does distort reality. i’m not sure they see things “as they really are.” their stand on abortion certainly does not leave a lot of room for certain realities to slip in.

    ditto euthanasia. they call it a homicide, when it is clearly a suicide. but the reason for that suicide is something that they don’t care to look at. maybe the pain is too great, maybe the cost of prolonging life will ruin your family. these things matter.

    (and they clearly forget that jesus pretty much committed suicide by allowing himself to be crucified. he coulda gotten out of it. but he died for the greater good. he just let someone else do it for him.)

  • Glenn Contrarian

    zing –

    No, Jesus did not ‘pretty much commit suicide’. He submitted himself to legal authority when they came to arrest Him, and submitted Himself to their particular system of justice. In other words, He obeyed the law of the land even though it meant His death.

  • zingzing

    glenn, i’ll have to admit i was just trying to get some christian blood boiling with that one, but if you’re going with the legal argument, he was condemned for blasphemy, correct? if he wasn’t guilty of blasphemy (and how could he be?), then he let them kill him under false pretenses. he was arrested, tried and executed on false charges. so there was no justice, and the law of the land was never broken.

    pilate, doubtful of jesus’ guilt, even offered him a chance to speak up, but he refused. (all this according to very, very flimsy sources, of course.)

  • http://thingsalongtheway.blogspot.com/ Cindy

    What happens when a Catholic supports a govt which wages war? Mortal sin? What about when a Catholic makes excuses for torture or supports a govt that engages in torture? What about supporting a govt that lies?

    Church-loving Catholics seem like people with no personal moral compass. You can convince them to abort foetuses left and right if the pope thought it was a good idea. They will buy anything the right authority is selling. Murder people with guns and bombs? No problem. Torture? No problem. Unwanted children being abused and neglected and lacking medical care and food? No fucking problem for Catholics. Dress up and go to church and make sure you get into heaven by saying those magic words before you die. The fact that you did nothing to help suffering humanity and even contributed to the suffering is not at all important.

    If I were god and I had a heaven, I wouldn’t let anyone in unless they were children or paupers. (Hmmm, seem I heard that somewhere.) I’d especially toss people into hell for worshiping me (thinking I could possibly be such a small-minded being as they are) instead of going out and helping my children.

    We create hell. It’s right here on earth. “The Kingdom of God is Within You“.

  • Glenn Contrarian

    zing –

    To Christians, Jesus was of course not guilty at all of blasphemy. However, to the people who clamored for His death, He certainly was guilty. The people were wrong of course, just like juries sometimes are even now.

    Frankly, I do not think that Pontius Pilate was as evil as many claim he was, because look at his motive – to him, Jesus was just another Jew, and he was doing his best to prevent riots, civil disorder, and unnecessary death among the people he governed. As far as I can tell, he was trying to do what he thought best for the people he governed. While the crowd calling for Jesus’ death was filled with malice, I see no particular malice in Pontius Pilate’s actions towards Jesus.

    Ah, but that’s probably heresy to most….

  • http://delibernation.com/blog/3 Silas Kain

    Jesus’ death was a political move generated by a bunch of “court” Jews who knew that His sphere if influence threatened their political hold on Judea. Pontius Pilate was the scapegoat.

  • http://drdreadful.blogspot.com Dr Dreadful

    To Pilate, Jesus would have been just another pesky Jewish revolutionary. They were ten a denarius at the time. There would have been no reason for him to feel any malice towards the guy, especially as he seemed to make a point of shunning violence and the rousing of rabbles.

  • http://ruvysroost.blogspot.com Ruvy

    You have this almost right, Silas. Judaea was a Roman colony, and the ruler owed his power to the Roman savages. The ruler had what was known as a synedrion, a political council that could serve as a court. No Jewish court would sentence a man to crucifixion – it is not prescribed in the Torah. But a council of “court Jews” beholden to the Roman savages would.

    This assumes that the story of Jesus has any truth to it. But true or not, Jews have been scapegoated for the decisions of a judenrat for two millennia. Thus, my contempt for the scum in America who so eagerly serve as Obama’s (or Bush’s) judenrat, today.

  • Baronius

    Cindy, that’s not right at all. Catholics aren’t without a moral compass. As you know, there is a lot of discussion within the Church about moral issues. It’s truer to say that we take our moral compasses seriously.

    War is a complicated issue. The Church teaches that there is such a thing as a just war. Most aren’t. There’s no such thing as a just abortion, or just torture. Care for the poor is another complicated one. A person has a serious responsibility to take care of his fellow man, but no one says how much or how little is sufficient.

    Remember the story about the rich man and Lazarus? The rich man doesn’t get out of hell by saying a few incantations. He’s punished for failing to take care of the poor. We take that seriously. The Catholic Church, you may know, is the largest relief organization in the world.

  • Glenn Contrarian

    Ruvy –

    Perhaps from your perspective it might be best to see Obama as we’ve described Pontius Pilate. Why? Because Obama’s trying to do what he believes is best for all people and particularly those whom he governs, and not just Israel. Unless you can point to an act of deliberate malice by Obama towards Israel, it is not good to assume that he is somehow against Judaism.

  • http://thingsalongtheway.blogspot.com/ Cindy

    the Catholic Church see things…Probably as white, gray, and black as things really are. (Baronius)

    well, they view things through the values and shading of a 2,000 year old religion, which really does distort reality. i’m not sure they see things “as they really are.” (zing)

    And what they were like was power-hungry psychopaths. They used torture and genocide for simple non-belief. I don’t recall where Jesus ever said, if someone doesn’t believe in your church they should be tortured and killed on a rack or in an iron maiden or a judas seat, or with a heretic’s fork or women should have their breasts ripped out. I can’t recall where Jesus had a cache of torture devices at the ready for people who did not believe him. Then there is the genocide in the 1940s I linked to the video. And this is nothing really, just a tip of a giant iceberg of sickness in the institution of the catholic church. I wonder what sort of issue sexual abuse of children is–black, white, gray? Maybe it’s one of those invisible issues.

    This is the direct history of the people Baronius says, see things more clearly.

    Look at the video I posted in 169 Baronius. You will see pictures there of popes consorting with Hitler and other evil people to keep power. Look, if you want to believe these are clear thinkers and good guys go ahead. No one who isn’t making an insane excuse could possibly agree with you. The church is an institution of domination which happens to use belief (a powerful thing which, as one might expect, works well) as the tool by which it accomplishes this goal–domination. For example, who told you that Jesus supported churches? Did Jesus say that? Or did his self-appointed representatives say that to gain control over the populace? You have to look at what church officials write to find that. How convenient that I write that Jesus made me an authority that you have to obey to get into heaven–nothing coercive there.

    Domination is riddled with evil and sickness–Jesus was nothing about that, it was that very thing that he was opposing.

  • Baronius

    Cindy, what do you expect me to say? That those Croatian Catholics weren’t monsters? Of course they were. Where did I say that all Catholics are good people worthy of heaven? I didn’t even say that was true about popes.

  • STM

    zing writes: “and to stm, you’re certainly in a condescending mood today, aren’t you?”

    Lol.

    Pot, meet kettle.

  • http://ruvysroost.blogspot.com Ruvy

    Unless you can point to an act of deliberate malice by Obama towards Israel, it is not good to assume that he is somehow against Judaism.

    Glenn,

    Obama rolls around with a pack of Arab terrorists and apostate Jews. He deliberately distorts history to make Israel look like the equivalent of the Nazis who murdered Jews off (the Cairo speech). He lied to AIPAC about Jerusalem (June 2008), and is instrumental (along with Shim’on Peres) in setting up a fake “pro-Israel” organization, J Street. He forces the Israeli government to first freeze and then to abandon the Jewish settlement in the heartland of Judea and Samaria. That is my bill of particulars, Glenn; malice with intent to destroy.

    Obama is the equivalent of a Roman savage, the kind of man one kills as the ancient Sicarii did who fought in Jerusalem against the “court Jews” of ancient Judaea.

    But it is not worth it!

    No. It is extremely important Obama remain alive and healthy. He still has things to do for the national camp in Israel

    That son of a bitch Obama has to be alive long enough to get Israelis to hate Netanyahu and the traitors he hangs with, Barak and Mazuz. That son of a bitch has to be alive long enough to get Israelis to see that Peres is nothing but an Israeli Benedict Arnold. He’s close to doing that.

    And we in Israel have to clean up the Jewish shit – the judenrat ruining this nation today. Once that is done, Obama can be allowed to his natural fate – whatever G-d decides that to be.

    Remember, Glenn. I supported Obama for a reason. I wasn’t kidding around.

    What was the fate of the Roman savages who destroyed Judaea? They died in peace. But their descendants died under the swords of the Gothic German tribes – in blood and fire.

    Modern Rome (America) is headed for a similar fate – modern Europe is headed for a similar fate – blood and fire.

  • Glenn Contrarian

    whooooo….

    There’s a lot of anger in those words. Funny how the written word can so effectively transmit tone and strong emotion half a world away.

    He deliberately distorts history to make Israel look like the equivalent of the Nazis who murdered Jews off (the Cairo speech).

    IIRC, he did NOT equate the Jews to the Nazis, but said that in the present conflict, both sides have done wrong.

    He lied to AIPAC about Jerusalem (June 2008)

    How so?

    and is instrumental (along with Shim’on Peres) in setting up a fake “pro-Israel” organization, J Street

    Okay, I haven’t heard of this one. Please fill me in.

    He forces the Israeli government to first freeze and then to abandon the Jewish settlement in the heartland of Judea and Samaria.

    There’s definitely two sides to this issue, Ruvy, and I know that you will by default refuse to see this issue from the Palestinian point of view.

    That is my bill of particulars, Glenn; malice with intent to destroy.

    I see insinuations, suspicions, and at least one (perhaps unintentional) distortion of fact, but I see no proof of malice. Proof, please.

  • http://ruvysroost.blogspot.com Ruvy

    Glenn,

    I’m not pleading a case; I’m pronouncing judgment. You know well what the difference is. The details supporting the particulars I set forth can be found, mostly in the articles of Arutz Sheva for the last few of days. I’ll leave you to peruse them at will. The lies to AIPAC took place in June, 2008 and were documented in my own article of that time on Obama, ‘Barry Obama Loves the Jews – Not‘ here at Blogcritics Magazine.

  • zingzing

    stm: “Pot, meet kettle.”

    psh. go listen to some terrible australian music. [flippant gesture of some sort.]

  • zingzing

    ruvy, i think we all get the feeling that if you don’t agree with someone, they want to destroy israel and the jews. it’s pretty strange that everyone in europe, north america and the middle east wants to destroy you, yet you survive. one would think that the combined might of the entire western and middle eastern world would be enough. maybe we aren’t trying that hard. who knows.

    it might actually bring us together as a world, you know. sacrifice another jew for peace, i guess. that might be the plan.

    ok, stm, there’s your condescension.

  • Kevin

    Ruvy–Try:

    Catholicism and Fundamentalism/ Keating
    Pope Fiction/ Madrid
    What Catholics Really Believe/ Keating
    Christ the King, Lord of History/ Carroll
    Render Unto Ceasar/ Chaput
    Jesus of Nazareth/ Ratzinger
    Reflections of a Pro-Life Warrior/ Cetrulo
    Ending Abortion/ Pavone
    Dissent from the Creed/ Hogan
    Party of Death/ Ponnuru
    Show Me God/ Hereen

    Just a few souces I have. And ho, I didn’t pull them from Amazon! I also seem to remember many Catholics sneaking Jews out of Germany in WWII. I remember the Pope’s actions that saved hundreds of Jews during WWII. I’m sure that Israel has been a staunch ally of the US–at least until Obama got into office. I believe the US will attack Iran if it does shoot a missile at Israel–who they’ve wanted to wipe the off the face of the earth.

    There has been some anti-semitism, but not with most Americans. It sounds like you hyave a score to settle with somebody, and Christians/America are good scapegoats.

    You need a lot of prayer. For sure…

  • Glenn Contrarian

    Kevin –

    Why did the Vatican hide Ante Pavelic on Vatican grounds after WWII when he was wanted on genocide charges for slaughtering up to 700,000 Serbians?

    And your comment There has been some anti-semitism evinces your ignorance. The Inquisition lasted for over FOUR HUNDRED YEARS, the last victims being found by Napoleon’s troops! The very first Jewish Ghetto was opened up in Rome under the direction of the pope. And these aren’t counting the Jews slaughtered in Jerusalem in the pope-ordered/Catholic-led First Crusade.

    ‘some’ anti-semitism indeed!

    Of ALL the religions on the face of the planet, mainstream ‘Christians’ have killed more people in the name of God than any other religion.

    No, Kevin – the true Faith would not allow, would not directly order such atrocities…but the RCC has done so again, and again, and again, the last time being just over sixty years ago.

    Such atrocities would NOT be committed by the true Faith.

  • http://ruvysroost.blogspot.com Ruvy

    It sounds like you have a score to settle with somebody…

    Personally, I have a score to settle with the bus company, Egged; I have to take the bastards to court for the damage they managed to cause my wife recently.

    But as Jews and Israelis, we have bigger scores to settle. All of Israel will be one the frontline in the next war, says this report. I’m inclined to believe it.

    But more importantly, the UN General Assembly has decided to take up and likely adopt the Goldstone Report, a document that effectively outlaws OUR resistance to terrorism, while giving murderers a free pass. Our Developing Sanhedrin warned the UN not to do this – that it would bring G-d’s judgment upon mankind. The fools have chosen to anyway. They bring their own judgment upon their heads. Pray for me if you want to, but if you are really smart, you will pray to the G-d of Israel, the G-d That Will Strike you down, for mercy in the coming months and years.

    You will need it.

    Have a pleasant evening, Kevin. It’s after 01:00 here in Israel, and I need my beauty sleep. A busy day awaits me tomorrow.

  • zingzing

    there were some ridiculous atrocities committed against the jews by christians during the worst plague years, although i must admit that the pope noted that jews were dying in comparable numbers to christians, and therefore couldn’t be the source of the plague, like the christians thought. stupid people.

  • Kevin

    Silas–Your statement about when papal infallibility occurs reeks of conjecture. Who exactly told you when it ends and when it starts?

    The rest is answers to those who should be answered. Deno, I went to a Jesuit High School. I know how and what they teach.

    Glen–Many sects have a trinity? Just how many of those sects actually rose from the dead? And, the democrat health care plan does not have the words “no abortion”. Read all 1500 words of it. No words about “no abortion” signifies that they consider it a part of health care.

    Your accusations about the Vatican hiding something are laughable at best. Send me an e-mail at my posted address above, and I’ll send you an article which finally puts that lie to rest. You are strong enough to send me your e-mail, aren’t you?

    Cindy, why would Jesus come down from heaven, institute a Church, tell Peter he would be the leader, if He didn’t want men(as feeble as they are) to intercede on His behalf?

    Baronius, you make a lot of sense, but some things need to be corrected. The pope didn’t say for Catholics to vote the same as he would. He simply restated what several of the ‘non-negotiables’ are, and what the highest priority items to Catholics were. You need to keep in mind that priorities do exist, and if a person is aborted, all the other evils do not exist for that person–including torture, genocide, health care, incest, stealing, adultery…you NAME the evil.

    Ruvy–I feel sorry for you and your predicament in Israel. But your horribly erroneous info about Catholics murdering hundreds of thousands in gas chambers was way over the top.

    What you don’t understand is that when people commit those evils, they are not Catholic or any religion that I know of. The Catholic religion is not defined by the evil acts of what some people do. So many are misinformed about what the Catholic religion actually teaches.

    You cannot pronounce judgment on anyone. That’s up to God alone, and only He knows what the final outcome of anyone is. Your knowledge of what true history is spotty at best.

    I hope God has mercy on your soul. But only He knows exactly what will happen to it…

  • Clavos

    Baronius,

    Thanks for the history lesson about Cesare de Barono! One of the things I like about these threads is the opportunity to learn, and you provided a nice one.

    I went online and found a good site about Baronius.

  • http://drdreadful.blogspot.com Dr Dreadful

    Deno, I went to a Jesuit High School. I know how and what they teach.

    Then why are you like that?

    Glen–Many sects have a trinity? Just how many of those sects actually rose from the dead?

    A shining example of the subjectivist fallacy. Not to mention a red herring.

    …the democrat health care plan does not have the words “no abortion”. Read all 1500 words of it. No words about “no abortion” signifies that they consider it a part of health care.

    AFAIK, the Democratic plan also does not contain anywhere the words “no free breast enlargement surgeries for 14-year-old girls”. Are we then to conclude that all 14-year-old girls are to be eligible for free boob jobs under the plan?

    …if a person is aborted, all the other evils do not exist for that person–including torture, genocide, health care, incest, stealing, adultery…

    Health care is evil?!?!?

  • http://ruvysroost.blogspot.com Ruvy

    What you don’t understand is that when people commit those evils, they are not Catholic or any religion that I know of. The Catholic religion is not defined by the evil acts of what some people do. So many are misinformed about what the Catholic religion actually teaches

    That is the same crock of shit my friend from southern Minnesota would spout. And it is a crock of shit. You refuse to accept responsibility for the actions of those who not only called themselves Catholic, but who exercised authority in the name of the pathetic pack of killers, liars and sluts that you call “the true faith”. Let me quote you the words of Catholic prelates, found in the book, “Cracking the Torah Code”, by Dr. Jeffrey Satinover, p.75.

    Rabbi Michael Weissmandl, and his father-in-law, Rabbi Ungar, heads of a yeshivá in Nitra, Slovakia, the only remaining yeshivá in German controlled Europe in 1942, contacted Bishop Karl Kmetko, who lived in Nitra, to see if he would attempt to intercede on behalf of Jews being expelled from their homes to concentration camps.

    This was his response: “This is not an expulsion! There [in the German camps] you will not die from hunger or the plague; they will slaughter all of you together, from the aged to the infants to the women on one day! And you deserve this punishment. The only advice I can give you is to come over to our religion, and then I will do what I can to annul the decree.”

    Note, Kevin, a Slovakian bishop said “you will deserve this punishment”. Let’s see why.

    Two years later, after Rabbi Ungar had died, Rabbi Weissmandl appealed to the papal nuncio in Bratislava, Monsignor, Giuseppe Burzio, to do something to save the lives of innocent Jewish children whom the Germans were shipping off to concentration camps to be executed. This is what the good monsignor said, representing the dogma of his “true faith”: “There is no such thing as the innocent Jewish blood of Jewish children! All Jewish blood is guilty, and the Jews must die because that is their punishment for that sin.

    “that sin”. What is “that sin”? “That sin” is murdering off Jesus – your accusation of deicide flung in the face of Jews for twenty centuries! So, all Jewish blood is guilty, Kevin, while “…when people commit those evils, they are not Catholic or any religion that I know of.”

    What a crock of shit!!

    Bishop Kmetko held all Jews responsible and liable to die, as did Monsignor Burzio. These were the so-called “church fathers”. This is not some trashy little “collection of sayings in the Talmud” put together to smear Jews, Kevin. This is what real live Catholics did to condemn Jews to death by the Nazis. This is the “mercy” of the bloodied hands of the bastards who blessed the murder of Jews for twenty centuries and called it “the work of G-d”.

    These were Catholics and YOU are a Catholic, and YOU haven’t the cojones to man up and say, “yes, Catholics did horrible things, and we Catholics were wrong”.

    If you haven’t even that small scintilla of courage and honesty, who are you to tell anyone that Catholics are innocent of sin while the blood still stinks on their hands?

    What hypocrisy!!

    I warned you in two separate comments, Kevin. I told you that Jews have long memories, and I told you that Jewish culture and history is a landmine for people like you, and that you needed to be honest and forthright if you wanted to deal with people like me.

    Still, you have come with your chin stuck out waving the cross of your “true faith”.

    If you look in this book, “Cracking the Torah Code”, by Dr. Jeffrey Satinover, you will see that there are Catholics who are not scum and trash, who bring honor to your people. But you will have to look yourself, Kevin.

    In the mean-time, don’t preach to me. And pray to the G-d of Israel, the Living G-d, for forgiveness for yourself and your fellow Catholics for the evil they have done my people, and multitudes of others as well.

  • http://drdreadful.blogspot.com Dr Dreadful

    It is curious that Christians (not only Catholics) through the centuries have blamed Jews for killing Christ.

    Let’s put aside the bothersome fact that if Jesus hadn’t been put to death there would be no Christian faith (and in that case shouldn’t they be grateful to the Jews…?).

    Crucifixion was a particularly Roman method of execution (Spartacus, anyone?), yet history contains no systematic religious persecution of Italians or Romans. Perhaps that’s because… now where is the Catholic Church based again?… Ah yes…

  • Baronius

    ‘You refuse to accept responsibility for the actions of those who not only called themselves Catholic, but who exercised authority in the name of the pathetic pack of killers, liars and sluts that you call “the true faith”.’

    Ruvy, that’s exactly what you said you wouldn’t do: blame Catholics for the actions of other Catholics. Or is there some subtle difference between blaming and expecting someone to take responsibility? And how is that any different from Monsignor Burzio falsely assigning blame?

  • Kevin

    Ruvy–Wow, you’ve shown you’re true colors! You seem to be one bitter person, who can’t forgive, but who only remembers hate. How does it feel to be able to go to your deathbed with an emotion like that?

    You seem to have ‘pigeonholed’ every piece of scum of humanity who’s ever called themselves Catholic! I seem to remember that Hitler actually called himself Catholic in his early years. I remember many Jews who called themselves Jews but did every disgraceful act towards humanity that no Jew in his right mind would own up to.

    Jews never killed Jesus, Ruvy. HUMANITY did. Jesus just happened to be a Jew when it was done. Get your facts straight for once.

    I have NO idea who that alleged bishop and monsignor were that you alluded to. They certainly espoused no Catholic upbringing, teaching, or faith.

    You’ve never even picked up one of the books I mentioned earlier. You refuse to believe the actions of Pope Pius X during WWII, and you refuse to believe the sacrifices made by Catholics trying to free Jews from Germany during WWII.

    You don’t even acknowledge that the holocaust involved the killing of approximately 6 million Jews, and over a MILLION Catholics. You will not accept that a Jew–“Jesus”–did not come to eliminate Judaism, but only to improve and perfect it, because He was the true God.

    Yes, people that called themselves Catholic, Jews, Methodists, Presbyterians, Mormons, Muslims, etc., etc., HAVE done horrible things throughout history. But that DOESN’T define their actual faith by any means.

    Yet, if I call myself Catholic, I share in the responsibility of every wayward Catholic throughout history–at least according to you. I’m afraid I’m NOT the emotional tail wagging the dog.

    I’ve just prayed for your soul, Ruvy. Just remember, if your wrong your hate, vengence, raw emotions, and animosity will likely not save you. Thank heavens that’s all up to God

    But even I don’t believe the story you came up with will sway His knowledge here. Fortunately, I’ve been wrong before.

  • Glenn Contrarian

    Kevin –

    Glen–Many sects have a trinity? Just how many of those sects actually rose from the dead?

    Try looking at the trinities of Hinduism, of the Babylonian, Sumerian, and Egyptian gods. In OT times, from modern-day India to the Pyrenees of modern-day Spain, there was only ONE culture and nation that did not worship some form of a trinity – the Hebrews.

    Instead of reading only things that support your belief, perhaps you should learn to seriously consider the facts that are against your belief. The simple fact that you’re part of a religion that is proven (by its own admission) to have committed mass torture, mass murder, and literally hundreds of cases of child rape/abuse…do you really think that the Church established by Jesus would commit such atrocities?

    And, the democrat health care plan does not have the words “no abortion”. Read all 1500 words of it. No words about “no abortion” signifies that they consider it a part of health care.

    No, it doesn’t say “no abortion”. What it DOES say (unlike the GOP bill), is that abortion coverage may not be part of the required minimum coverage package for health insurance providers, but it also doesn’t bar the coverage of abortion by those insurers. There’s a difference between “cover” and “pay for,” however, and the bill blocks the use of public funds to pay for abortions. (Public funds would include federal subsidies to help those below a certain income level buy insurance.) The exception is the so-called “public option,” which would have to pay for abortions that would be covered under current Medicaid rules, that is, in cases of rape, incest or risk to the life of the mother.

    Kevin, you rail against the Obama plan because it doesn’t do more against abortion…but where’s your ‘righteous outrage’ about the GOP health reform plan that does NOTHING extra to prevent abortions? Hm? Most people would call this ‘hypocrisy’.

    Your accusations about the Vatican hiding something are laughable at best. Send me an e-mail at my posted address above, and I’ll send you an article which finally puts that lie to rest. You are strong enough to send me your e-mail, aren’t you?

    You should be aware, Kevin, that I try NEVER to make accusations I can’t prove. So, for proof, how about these OSS and Army intelligence documents?

    Here’s the Franciscan order and mass murderer Draganovic

    Here’s mass murderer Pavelic being protected by the Vatican.

    Here’s Vatican sponsorship of the Ustase regime, with the knowledge that the Ustase regime had committed the genocide.

    Here’s another member of the Ustase regime being hidden by the Franciscan order in Rome

    Here’s how the Ustase had moved their gold to Rome

    You asked if I were strong enough to send you proof – and the above links are just part of the proof. Now, are YOU strong enough to READ the documents, to OBJECTIVELY RESEARCH what happened? We’ll see.

  • http://ruvysroost.blogspot.com Ruvy

    Baronius,

    Ruvy, that’s exactly what you said you wouldn’t do: blame Catholics for the actions of other Catholics. Or is there some subtle difference between blaming and expecting someone to take responsibility? And how is that any different from Monsignor Burzio falsely assigning blame?

    I’m not blaming Kevin for anything. He never killed anybody – at least, not to my knowledge. Nor does he evince any sign of Jew-hatred. This too, is not an issue here. But there is a huge difference between taking responsibility; recognizing, however painfully, that one’s own people did evil; and artfully dodging that responsibility – which is what this when people commit those evils, they are not Catholic or any religion that I know of… is.

    Now let’s drive this home – nail the body to the cross, so to speak.

    Bishop Kmetko was not entirely wrong to say to Rabbis Weissmandl and Ungar, “you deserve to die.” To see why, let’s look at a Jew’s take on this very issue. Rabbi Meir Kahane, a man whom I regard as a hero, and probably the greatest Jew of my generation, wrote Confronting the Holocaust Jewishly because he was disgusted with the way Jews had managed not to confront the murder of their own people – and had managed to deny G-d’s existence in the process.

    Let me make clear why I regard Rav Kahane as a hero. It’s not because I agree with a lot of his political stances – though I do. It’s not because he taught me that Jews should stand up and fight and not give a damn what non-Jews think – even though that is what I attempt to do. It is not because he was from Brooklyn – even though he was, and so am I. It is because of this essay I’ve linked to here.

    In this essay, Rav Meir Kahane, member of the Israeli Parliament in 1985 (when this essay was written), scholar, and leader of the Jewish People, did what very few Jews ever had the balls to do. He wrote that the Jews deserved to have been murdered off by the Nazis and he justified it. He manned up, and said the evil the Jews committed in Eastern Europe for about three centuries brought upon them the wrath of G-d – Who is not a beaming Santa Claus, but a G-d of Justice, who demands a code of behavior and a devotion from Jews that Jews in Eastern Europe did not give Him. While other Jews turned the victims of the Nazis into sainted souls who were pure and innocent, Kahane, at cost to his own soul and self esteem, TOLD THE TERRIBLE TRUTHS OF HOW JEWS BEHAVED TOWARDS EACH OTHER IN EASTERN EUROPE. His sharpest criticism was not aimed at the secularist Jews of America – it was aimed at his own, the “Orthodox” Jews – of America, Israel, but most particularly Eastern Europe.

    He enunciated a very basic Jewish principle – where there is sin there is punishment, and where there is punishment, there is sin. And there was indeed, much sin in Eastern Europe, sin that Kahane recalled his father telling him about as a child.

    I see the culture that Rav Kahane described in his essay, and have to wonder – this is very similar to the society I see around me in Israel. Are we headed for similar punishment? Go ahead – read the link. It is not a pleasant read, but you will see the difference between how a believing Jew faces his people’s sins – and Kevin’s dodgy approaches heretofore.

    Now, Christians have thrown the charge of deicide in our faces for centuries. This is what Burzio was referring to. Now, that we have our own country, we really don’t have to give a damn about these scurrilous charges. Our nukes can answer your charges, if you push the issue hard enough. This is not Honduras.

    But you have to care about the truth of these charges. They, and the behavior they provoked, damn you. And neither of you, not Kevin nor yourself, seem to be willing to admit that in the 1940’s, these charges of Jewish deicide were the standard beliefs of most believing Christians. It is not we Jews who need the holocaust museums. We have had grief enough. We know. YOU need them – to remind you all of the savagery of Christianity, and the sword and cross stuck in the ribs of mankind – and of the satanic racialist beliefs the Nazis espoused. It is you, not us, who need the reminders – you run away from all this – your murders and genocides – all too easily. You run away from your moral standards all too easily, also. To the degree that Jews have led you along that path, we will suffer, and will deserve to suffer.

    By contrast, we Jews have to look in the mirror – and fear what we think, and what the Big Guy Upstairs thinks. Fear of G-d is the beginning of wisdom.

  • Glenn Contrarian

    Ruvy –

    For all the times I growl at you in utter frustration at your obstinacy, there are times that you post brilliantly.

    #200 was one of those brilliant times. Well said!

  • Kevin

    Glen–Now you’re indicating who you voted for, and that abortion is not that serious.

    Bottom line-those documents you provided were hardly anything near proof. Too many have scratches and white-outs. You can’t tell what is truth, fiction, or simply unproved pipe dreams.

    Another bottom line–the liberal media would’ve been all over this had any of this panned out. Afraid not.

    How come you never aswered the question about the Resurrection? What makes you believe unproven fantasies about your statements about Catholics? Who told you these things? As I’ve mentioed before, if you want to talk about these things, take it to my website, listed at the end of the column. What are you worried about?

    So I guess you haven’t read all 1500 words yet? And you love to play with words, don’t you? Abortion coverage “MAY NOT” be part of the plan??? Who are you trying to kid?? It doesn’t “BAR” the coverage of abortion???

    The bill does NOT block the use of taxpayer funds for abortions!

    After many attorneys and politicos have also read the existing health care plan, they agree that abortions will occur, and the public will have to PAY for them. I guess it puts a whole new light on the “public option”. And it certainly seems like you have NO understanding of medicare or medicaid rules. You’re not on any of them, are you?

    There is NO blocking of public funds to pay for abortions. Please cite the line # that says that.

    The GOP doesn’t have to say anything about abortion. It’s not in their platform to allow abotion, and it’s not in their platform to run health care.

    As I said, I’ve read your documents–where I could. I would consider them the worst sort of hearsay ever, that is if they’re real documents. Do you know what proof is?

    Please don’t even say you’re Catholic, because you would’ve probably been excommunicated by the time you were 17.

  • zingzing

    kevin, what are these 1500 words you keep referring to?

    you seem to think that the bible, as obscured as it is by the catholic church, is evidence enough of god’s existence… or so i gather. you never really answered my question about how god proved himself…

    so chapter and verse is good enough for you, but proper documentation isn’t? do you know what hearsay is? do you know what documentation is?

    you really do have quite a thick head. won’t let anything else in there, will you?

  • http://ruvysroost.blogspot.com Ruvy

    Glenn,

    Than you for the kind words. I have a question for you? How did you get 5 URL links into your comment? I thought the limit was three.

  • http://drdreadful.blogspot.com Dr Dreadful

    Ruvy,

    As far as I can discern, the three-link limit went by the by when the new site was launched.

    Link away! :-)

  • Glenn Contrarian

    Kevin –

    I have little time till Saturday, but I’ll get back to you on the bill…and as I said, the Democratic bill contains at least some safeguard against using federal funds for abortion, but the GOP plan has no such safeguards.

    You obviously like the conservative side, the pro-war and the pro-TORTURE side. I’ll refrain from saying anything about upholding an old Catholic tradition.

    No, I’m not Catholic, thank God. I am a strong Christian, and I learned about 18 years ago just how wrong trinitarian thought is.

    Lastly, I notice you did NOT even try to refute the proof I provided of the Vatican’s involvement with the Ustase regime after the murder of 700K or so innocents for the ‘crime’ of not being Catholic.

    Think about that – is the RCC really the true Church? After seven crusades that slaughtered many innocents because they weren’t Catholic, after many wars in Europe against those who would accept the papacy, after nearly half a millenium of Inquisition, after TWO THOUSAND YEARS of existence, the RCC STILL gets involved in genocide?

    And you think the RCC’s the true Church? Time to remove the scales from your eyes, friend.

  • http://ruvysroost.blogspot.com Ruvy

    DD,

    Thanks for the information. Now I don’t have the excuse of not providing link after link after link of proof to push my arguments. Writing articles is hard enough. Now, upholding my end of the arguments will be harder also!

    [I can just read these guys minds now: “No matter what we do for improvements, they always complain!!”] LOL!

  • http://ruvysroost.blogspot.com Ruvy

    Now, Kevin, this was supposed to be your little playground to explain why so many of America’s Catholics were excommunicated for voting for Obama. That’s a Catholic issue and one that is not for me to comment on at all. My initial comment was to kind of focus on your issue – we’ve seen how you have trouble focusing on issues elsewhere.

    But you decided to argue with me instead. Bad move, Kevin. You shouldn’t try to cut a diamond with a piece of wrought iron, and that is exactly what you have tried to do. You’ll bust your knife.

    Perhaps you would like to tell the waiting multitudes here why Incest and genocide may be evil most of the time. But they don’t fit the ‘intrinsic’ label.

    It’s not that I don’t think that abortion is evil. But how is it that shoving two hundred people into a gas chamber is not intrinsically evil, and murdering off a fetus is?

    Perhaps you would like to answer both Cindy and Glenn Contrarion about the massacres carried out by the Ustashe in Croatia with the approval of the Vatican and the subsequent help the Vatican gave to Croatian war criminals fleeing prosecution.

    I’m giving you the opportunity to wash the stink of murder and blood off your beloved “church fathers”, Kevin. Or at least to try. You many not be able to.

    I’m also giving you the opportunity to admit that these people were murderers and they were Catholics, and to do what truly great men, like Angelo Roncalli and Karol Wojtyla did – apologize.

    And remember. Unlike you, I have no trouble calling fellow Jews murderers if that is what they indeed are, or in telling the painful truths about what evil Jews do. There is no whitewash on my palette, Kevin.

    We await your answers, sir.

    NU?? Before the messiah comes, boychick…

  • Mark

    I called Archbishop Sheehan’s office — you catholics who voted for Obama don’t have to worry or even confess your vote.

  • Baronius

    Ruvy, I tried to analyze your comment #200 fairly. I think you’re approaching the issue with “old” (to me) covenant thinking. To Christians, the time of racial judgement and tribal blame is over. G-d introduced a new covenant based on a Person, not a group. In this new thinking, Kevin has nothing to apologize for, even if you somehow consider Catholics to be a tribe. I know that way of thinking is alien to you.

    It’s worth noting that just as there is personal salvation in the new covenant, there is personal responsibility for sin. So every Christian should understand that his sins are responsible for Christ’s death. Thinking otherwise (for example, blaming the Jews) is a failure of catechesis.

    Anyway, the point is that I have no need to apologize for something that Monsignor Burzio did. I don’t think I even have the right to do so.

  • http://marksaleski.com Mark Saleski

    excommunication? ah, big deal. i decided all of this god stuff was crap back in 5th grade when one of the nuns in school showed us a little plastic container that supposedly held a sliver of jesus’ cross.

    riiiight.

    burn…in…hayull.

  • Kevin

    Glen–I guess you’re wrong again. The new heath care bill has NO safeguards against abortion whatsoever. Read the whole bill. It does not sound like you have.

    I told you once, the GOP version has no comments about abortion because it doesn’t have to. Abortion, health care is in one of its planks, but only to get rid of it.

    The only thing a Catholic is supposed to believe in, is a Just War. But don’t worry, you wouldn’t know anything about that. Never have I said I’m pro-torture. I have said that waterboarding does not fit the normal definition of torture. I have also said it was justified when it saved thousands on the West Coast. But worry not, you probably know nothing about that either.

    When you learned 18 years ago that the Trinity was a bad thing, just who told you that?

    Lastly, we all know the Ustase regime was quite a crock. 1)I did give you reason why it was incorrect. 2)The Vatican was never involved with them. Your “proof” was non-existent. 3)Your assesment that the Vatican was involved with the deaths of 700K innocents was a total pipe dream. How come we heard nothing from the liberal media about that?

    And the RCC was never involved with 7 crusades, although there was a total of 11. The RCC being involved with any genocide??? You know how far the liberal media would have run with that if it were even close to being true?

    You still haven’t visited my website. What are you afraid of?

  • Kevin

    Ruvy–I only gave competing arguments to counter the ones you brought up. My, have you changed your tune! Maybe some of my prayers for you are helping.

    And I thought I explained to you how incest and genocide are evil most of the time. But back in the Old Testament incest was probably tried when there were no others around to copulate. And genocide has been evil every time I’ve seen it, at least. Isn’t abortion a form of genocide?

    But I don’t judge as you do. There may be times that it is not evil. I can’t see how that’s possible. But I would imagine you have to know all the circumstances, which I know you don’t.

    Shoveling 200 people into a gas chamber is evil. But you were the one who actually accused Catholics of doing that. Such accusation is a major sin, but the name escapes me now.

    I’ve given you the opportunity numerous times to correct your history, but you’ve continued on your radical rant. How come?

    You’ve never said anything about the murders that Jews have committed, or any evil in their hearts.

    You refuse to answer any questions, you never commented that Jesus was a Jew before He was Christian, never commented on His Resurrection, never went to my website where your separated from your cohorts. What am I to think of you??

    Just what do you think that goes though my mind when I thik of someone who blames almost everything on Catholics, and twists history to try to prove his point.

    May God TRULY have mercy on your soul!

  • http://www.maskedmoviesnobs.com El Bicho

    “You still haven’t visited my website. What are you afraid of?”

    If your foolish, poorly reasoned comments are any indication, likely the time wasted they will never get back.

  • Jas200

    It seems that through all the bickering and and bolstering of each individuals certain beliefs that the true problem has yet to be discussed. This problem lies inherently in the form of any major religion or organized belief structure.

    It is the fact that all, not just a select few, but all major religious structures are guilty of the same crimes. The history of not a single religion can be looked at without a biased eye. All are guilty of the very sins they preach against. Genocide, murder, rape, torture, etc. All have been carried out by “believers” who follow belief structures that are created by the minds of men.

    Blind faith is a very dangerous thing, which is a trait that many seem to display here. By rejecting all other possibilities over one is the true sin. To quote the bible as being the truth, or any other document for that matter, without any true knowledge of its veracity is simply ridiculous. These “holy” documents were written by men, twisted and altered throughout history by new writers spanning the bridges between languages. Who is to know if the bible of today bears any resemblance to its intitial creation?

    The fact is that spirituality and faith are wonderful things in and of themselevs, but they are things that should be yours and yours alone. No one can truly say that they know Judaism is correct, or Christianity is the one true religion, because even those devout believers still do not know, or maybe they do?

    But it is in that fact that a new problem arises. So many people from so many different religions claim to be in contact with the almighty or the supernatutral, whatever form that may take. How can one disprove the other? They can’t, but neither can prove themselves either.

    And if there is a higher power than this is potentially the greatest gift of all to be given, the power to wonder, to ponder, and to believe and disbelieve. No one is right, no one is wrong. Your spirit is your own creation that you must look after and cultivate, whatever path that leads you down.

    Laying judgement on anyone for disagreeing is ludacris and establishing structure and tradition around any belief inherently kills it. No one, with a straight face can deny that over the course of human history no more blood has been shed or suffering wrought than that brought on by organized religion, every organized religion. The death of this world will, in all likelyhood, come from these differences we bring between ourselves; for the things we refuse to aknowledge about one another. We are so quick to dismiss the beliefs of others because we believe so strongly in our own; how ignorant and vain. It is only in humility and understanding that we can truly find salvation. All faiths have somethings to teach us, and the only truth one can really take from any teaching is its application in the present, to make your own life and the life of others worthy of the fleeting time we have here and now.

  • Kevin

    Jas–How unfortunate you believe as you do. You seem to be doing the same thing as Ruvy. Combining everyone who says they are a particular religions into what that religion teaches to do.

    Many say they belong to a specific religion but simply by their belief system they do not.

    Hopefully you will come to a better understanding of religion in the future.

  • http://ruvysroost.blogspot.com Ruvy

    Kevin,

    I argued seriously with my friend from southern Minnesota about responsibility – a concept that you and Baronius still try to evade. But she was my friend. And she still is.

    You’ve never said anything about the murders that Jews have committed, or any evil in their hearts.

    You, on the other hand, have no clue as to what you allege. Go read Rav Kahane’s article, if you want to get an idea of how a Jew will condemn his own in order to speak truth and correct heresy amongst his own.

    Jesus was a Jew before He was Christian…

    If that is your level of understanding, Kevin, you need Sister Mary Pat and her leather paddle to teach you. Talking with a Jew is above your pay grade, pal.

    See ya.

  • Kevin

    Ruvy–It’s too bad you still have a convoluted concept of responsibility. Baronius and I NEVER seem to evade any resposibility.

    You on the other hand want to condemn people who never knew the perpetrators, and insist what religion people are despite the fact that they have no belief in that religion at all.

    I didn’t realize that whatever Rav Kahane said, you said as well. If you actually say anything worth repeating, we’ll let you know.

    You seem awfully solid in your anger for any Christian. We will still pray for you, because God’s ability to change minds holds no bounds…

  • http://ruvysroost.blogspot.com Ruvy

    Like I said, Kevin. With your level of understanding, you still need Sister Mary Pat and her leather paddle. I’ve heard those sisters can be murderous on the buttocks.

    Now, back to your prayers….

  • Kevin

    Ruvy–Like I said, I hope God has mercy on your soul. Only He has that much mercy…

  • zingzing

    ah, look at the two little religions, bitching at each other. so cute.

  • http://delibernation.com Silas Kain

    Kevin, research infallibility for yourself and stop blindly accepting that which your Church supposedly teaches. It seems to me that you’ve picked the extremes of Roman doctrine to observe and refuse to accept that there are holes in the Swiss Cheese Roman version of Christianity. Truth be told, the Roman Catholic Church is the Amway among religions. It’s a multi-level marketing scheme which starts at the parish level and works all its’ profits straight to the Vatican.

    Oh, don’t get me wrong, the Church has done a lot of good in charitable works. But most of those works have exacted a price in the eradication of cultures and alternate beliefs. Kevin, the Roman Church is equally guilty of genocide as Hitler. And, like it or not, the evidence continues to manifest itself that the Roman Church came to the Holocaust table late in the game. The blood of millions of Jews AND others stains the hands of the Curia almost as if they held Hitler’s hand when he promulgated his horrors. The Roman Church’s history is rich in evidence which supports that Catholics, at the Pope’s direction, worked diligently to weed out Jews and kill them centuries before 1930.

    I grew up in a family which had a vile hatred for Russians and Germans. Having been educated by Polish nuns, we were reminded daily of Poland’s history and how there were three separate times when there was no Poland on the maps. Every morning we said our prayers in Polish, sang the Polish National Anthem or Boze Cos Polske (God Bless Poland). And after all of that was complete, we then pledged our allegiance to the American flag. But we were still reminded of all the evils perpetrated on Poles by Russia and Germany. Does it really make sense to carry this vendetta so many generations later? I think not.

  • Baronius

    Well, if it doesn’t really matter, Silas, why are you bringing up centuries-old disputes?

    What is your quarrel with the Catholic Church, anyway? I’m not trying to be polemical. Every time it comes up, you make the same denouncement, but you cite St. Malacy’s prophecies when you do it. Is that to be ironic, or do you have some belief?

  • http://delibernation.com Silas Kain

    Why bring up century old disputes? Baronius, what are we doing in Afghanistan and Iraq. We are policing centuries old disputes. There’s a serious situation ongoing between Turkey and Armenia which is a manifestation of centuries old disputes. The Islamic world doesn’t trust Christians because of centuries old disputes. I’m trying to make a point here. We owe it to those who come after us a full disclosure of history without the sanitization of ideology. If young Jews and Arabs were permitted to socialize and discuss do you not think that common ground could be achieved?

    What’s going on between Turkey and Armenia is a decades old vendetta concerning the Armenian genocide. Turkey refuses to admit it occurred. If the Poles can forge relationships with Russia and Germany after all these years it can be achieved anywhere on this globe. The sins of our Fathers are not our own.

    Insofar as St. Malachy, I do look at him as a minor prophet. We’ve had them over the centuries and they are not exclusive to the Roman Church. Even Harvey Milk was a minor prophet and the core of his message was you have to give people hope. Religion gives people hope. Christ gave people hope but along the way His message has been skewed. Baronius, there is a Divine Being — that I do not question. I also believe that we are a part of the Divine as well. There are no complications to my core beliefs. We have been given this great gift of free will where we make decisions and have to account for the consequences. Because we have been given this gift of free will, it only stands to reason that it would be contrary to God’s will to interfere with our individual choices. I thought that was the whole point of Noah’s Ark and the aftermath of the Flood. Perhaps Ruvy could explain it better than I.

  • http://ruvysroost.blogspot.com Ruvy

    I also believe that we are a part of the Divine as well. There are no complications to my core beliefs. We have been given this great gift of free will where we make decisions and have to account for the consequences. Because we have been given this gift of free will, it only stands to reason that it would be contrary to God’s will to interfere with our individual choices. I thought that was the whole point of Noah’s Ark and the aftermath of the Flood. Perhaps Ruvy could explain it better than I.

    Baronius,

    I probably could, but it would take far too long. Silas’ beliefs above display what the ideas of a Noahide – a follower of the Seven Laws of Noah – should look like. There is a basic belief in G-d, no trinitarian garbage, a belief in free will, and the likely willingness to follow the other laws of Noah.

    Silas was raised as a Polish Catholic. My father grew up in Poland, had to steal from Polish Catholics to survive, and when he lived there, there was a deep enmity between Catholics and Jews. So, I was raised to have a dislike for Polish Catholics. But on this list, it is Silas, more than anyone here, who understands what I’m talking about – not that he necessarily agrees, mind you. But he gets it. In G-d’s universe, irony abounds. G-d Has a very sharp Sense of Humor.

    The best I can with this is to relate what I do understand. Men having free will is a test. A Divine Test. Will they, with the appropriate pushing and shoving here and there, come to love G-d on their own? Will they therefore be fitting company for G-d over eternity? That is the best I can do in explaining the Divine Plan. The clues to the answers are to be found in the Prophecies of the Tana”kh – what our own ancient prophets foresaw as the future of the Children of Israel

    Redemption is the end of the Divine Test. It’s grading time – hence it winds up with Divine Judgment – something which, according to Jewish sages, does not take place all at once, but in stages. Thus the prime feature of the knowledge of good and evil (free will) – the exploitation of one man by another – goes away in stages as well. Most of Mankind is expected to follow the Laws of Noah. That is the Code for human behavior. All the world’s major religions embody these laws – except for Buddhism, which is silent on the issue of the existence of G-d.

    I do not foresee a single world religion – Man is too diverse for that. Bit by bit, they will drop those elements of the religions they follow that are most in conflict with the Laws of Noah. Christians will drop the trinitarian stuff, coming to see Jesus as a teacher, and doing what they can to emulate his ideas. Hindus will emphasize the G-dhead more and the individual gods and goddesses less and less, as they are mere reflections of the G-dhead. Muslims will drop the bloodthirst and abandon the ideas of the Wahhabi altogether, deciding to view jihad as internal struggle, and begin to see where the various haditha can be interpreted to make their practices humane rather than reflective of the charnel-house that one sees in Iran or Arabia.

    And us? Us Jews? Judaism will disappear altogether, transforming itself into the Faith of the Children of Israel. Our Israelite Brethren, now known as the Pathans or Pashtun, will get rid of their Taliban curse and seek first to go home to the Pashtunwali, and then finally to the Torah, and will over time join us here in Israel. And we, the Children of Israel, will eventually rule most of the Sinai, all of the land between the Jordan and the High Sea, and have as our eastern border the Euphrates River, as foretold in Scripture.

    Our role will be to help the rest of Mankind, to bring the Divine Light to Humanity. We’re beginning to do this already. Go check out all those Nobel Prizes. The Divine Light, Supernal Knowledge, is not merely spiritual – it is physical as well.

  • Irene Wagner

    Ruvy, I’m curious about your use of the term: “G-dhead.”

    Christians use that term when they are referring to God as a Unity, getting at the idea of the uniqueness and supremacy of God expressed in the Hebrew Shema.

    At other times, we refer to the Trinity in their separate roles e.g. Jesus as a man on earth, empowered by the Holy Spirit, executed the plans of the Father. And then at other times, to emphasize their complete unity in purpose and nature and love, we use the term Godhead.

    Are there specific instances in which a Jew use the term G-dhead instead of G-d?

    Those were interesting remarks on free will as a test, by the way. I’m thinking that the thing that combines with free will to make it the ultimate test is the fact that God is hidden sometimes to the point of appearing absent altogether. The Covering Cherub (Ezekiel 28:14-19) had free will in spades, and had complete intellectual assurance of the reality of God. He turned against God anyway.

    Faith that grows in a slow life-long dance of loving obedience rewarded by revelation weeds out the would-be Satans, so there won’t be a repeat performance of his rebellion in heaven.

    The term “faithist” is really starting to grow on me…

  • Irene Wagner

    Have to go now. Will plan to check back in the future to see if there’s an answer.

  • http://ruvysroost.blogspot.com Ruvy

    Short answer, Irene. No. I used this term because it is a term Hindus use, and my reference was to Hindus when I used the term in the comment. Didn’t see your question till now….

  • Irene Wagner

    I read “Hindus will emphasize the G-dhead more and the individual gods and goddesses less and less, as they are mere reflections of the G-dhead…” to indicate that you believed that in the Messianic age, Hindu polytheistic perception of the Divine would be coming more nearly in line with your own understanding of distinct emanations, or Sephirot, within an essentially indivisible G-dhead.

    Maybe that was what your long answer would have looked like.

  • Kevin

    Silas–Me researching infallibility will not aid in what the simple dictionary tells me.

    Where you’re getting your history of Catholicism is so convoluted even I can’t figure it out. What evidence of any of this can you be talking about?

    It’s so unfortunate that you’ve been convinced that there is some “vendetta” going on. Even the mainstream liberal press has not said anything about this. No history book I know of decries any false claim you have made.

    If any of that was true, we’d have all heard about it years ago. I’m part Polish myself, and we’ve recently had a Polish pope whop said nothing about your fabrication.

    Hey, I’ll be glad to continue this conversation on my private e-mail listed with my column. You game?

  • Kevin

    Ruvy–Please, eliminate all your hate and frustrations. Do not direct them toward another religion. Can God appreciate what you’re doing? What kind of retribution can you expect from such actions?

  • http://ruvysroost.blogspot.com Ruvy

    Irene,

    Hmmm….. I would never have thought to look to the concepts of Kabbalah that way. It is an original approach. The s’firót, the emanations you refer to, are something I generally stay away from, more out of ignorance than anything else.

    While I know something of Kabbala, I do not know enough of it to attempt to apply it in this way. One problem with using them (the s’firót) is that there are only ten of them – there are thousands of Hindu gods, goddesses and godlets of one variety or another. Further, to be absolutely honest with you, even if I did understand more about the 10 s’firót, I would be reluctant to discuss them on this forum. As you may have noticed, the author of the article hasn’t a clue of what I’m talking about, and while I do understand the Christian ideas of salvation reasonably well (you can’t not know them in a Christian milieu like the States) Kevin Roeten can only refer to my concepts of Redemption as “hatred” and “frustration”. He cannot tolerate the mere mention of them. Then you get this comment from zingzing – ah, look at the two little religions, bitching at each other. so cute.

    In this atmosphere, I would rather discuss these things with you personally, off-line, or with Silas Cain, or Baronius, were any of you so inclined.

  • zingzing

    heh. i find it hilarious that, even in an online forum, inter-religious communication becomes bitter sniping then completely breaks down.

  • http://delibernation.com Silas Kain

    Kevin I respectfully decline and here is why – I believe that the Ultimate Truth is we are Divinely given the gift of free will. And, inherent in the concept would naturally be to question everything. In order to actively participate the the gift of free will, one has to take advantage of the same. Having a Church or Scripture dictate your every action is blindly accepting that which is meant to be questioned. In order to experience one’s faith one must put it to the test. When you have evolved to such a state perhaps we can continue this dialog.

  • Baronius

    Silas, what if you put your faith to the test and found it correct? That was the weird experience I had as a young man. I looked at the Protestant denominations and found their arguments to be unconvincing. I looked at atheism and couldn’t find an explanation for how the world came into being. I looked at no religion at all, and found the arrogance at my rejection of the historical human experience to be absurd. I looked at Mormonism and found the Christian Bible to be pretty reasonable. I looked at mythologies and Buddhism and couldn’t find any evidence for them. The idea of being born into the right religion bothered me, so I examined Catholic Christianity and kept finding it to make sense, to have an accurate understanding of truth as I could perceive it and a plausible revelation. At some point I realized that I was wasting time indulging every argument. I wouldn’t say that I’m a blind follower now, but I’m faithful.

    I’m not going to judge Kevin. He’s got a swagger in his step that could be naivete or blindness, but who am I to guess? Point being that a person can arrive at faith without rejecting free will.

    This being the anniversary of the fall of the Berlin Wall, I’m reminded of a Czechoslovakian joke that socialism is the long, hard road from capitalism to capitalism. Kevin’s beliefs may be far less evolved than yours, or far more.

  • http://delibernation.com Silas Kain

    Baronius, like you I’ve had my journey. I’ve studied Catholicism, Mormonism, Rosicrucians, Wicca, Buddhism, Methodists and Unitarianism. I have settled upon being Unitarian and have been so for almost a dozen years.

    My faith has been tested many a time and I will readily admit that there are facets of Catholicism that have carried me through — even today. I’ve got faith but it is tempered with trying to live up to the Golden Rule when dealing with people of other faiths.

    Currently I have an ongoing dialog with my High School religion and philosophy teacher about these very topics. She was the one above all others in my youth who continually encouraged that each of her students question that which was taught. Were it not for this incredible woman I never would have experienced the journey of the last 12 years.

    Perhaps Kevin is more evolved than I. That’s not for me to figure out as I sense he is just beginning his own vision quest.

  • Irene Wagner

    Ruvy, I can understand your reluctance to discuss matters which make you vulnerable to being “crapped upon” in this setting. If I did emails, this is exactly the sort of thing I’d like to talk about with you, but I don’t do emails. Maybe some other time here on BC when Zing isn’t so feisty…

    Baronius, Silas, Kevin. How can the spiritual journey of anyone here on earth be finished before the Fat Lady Sings? It’s true, there’s a time you stop shopping around for denominations and settle on a group of people to hold you accountable so you don’t turn into Jim Jones. That framework for worship and service to people is important, but it’s only one aspect of searching deeper into the mystery that is God, and being changed by him.

    Baronius, somewhere along the way I think I gave you the impression that I am anti-Catholic, perhaps because of what you might have considered the flippancy of my references to “Lenten breaks” from BC, one of which will be resuming shortly. This is regrettable, and I won’t say it again if it bothers you. I generally find that when I meet a Catholic who talks more about Jesus than she does about Catholicism, I’ve found a Matthew 18:20 sort of person.

    And I am often humbled by people who don’t believe in Jesus, but who are following closely such light as they’ve been given. I think God is often present in conversations I have with such people as well.

  • http://delibernation.com Silas Kain

    How can the spiritual journey of anyone here on earth be finished before the Fat Lady Sings?

    In short, Irene, I don’t believe the spiritual journey ends at death. And I’m not convinced that gathering a group inside a building necessarily translates into discovering the Divine. This life is but a step in the ladder of spiritual growth. I don’t know what it is that comes next, I just instinctively feel it in my soul.

    Jesus was one of the greatest teachers, no doubt about it. But He is not alone. There have been other sages albeit less inspired who have walked among us. God is present everywhere and is the glue that holds everything together. We’re all connected in one way, shape or form and the enormity of such remains elusive to us because we just haven’t arrived at our personal stage of spiritual development. In my Unitarian studies I have come to realize that all “religions” share a common theme and by recognizing them, one can come to a clear understanding that things are much simpler than we want to believe. I hope that clarifies things a bit.

  • Irene Wagner

    There won’t be an Fat Ladies Singing at my death bed. Not metaphorical ones, anyway.

  • http://ruvysroost.blogspot.com Ruvy

    Baronius, Silas,

    You didn’t ask, but it should be evident that I also took a faith journey. Kevin’s presumptions that I know nothing are far more annoying that his half-baked attempts to sell me on Catholicism. I assume that you two gentlemen (Irene as well) have undergone faith journeys and the mere fact that I may disagree with you does not indicate that I do not respect those journeys you’ve undertaken in your lives.

    I started out as an atheist. The hypocrisy of the “conservative” synagogue and Talmud Torah I first learned Judaism from was so disgusting that I couldn’t stand it. The fact that nobody would answer simple questions – like “who did Cain marry?” – put me off and made me dismiss the whole thing as garbage – until two old Jewish ladies in Bagel Beach said, “if you don’t believe in G-d, you can’t be a Jew”. That stopped me up short. It was one thing to believe in something to shut people up, but it was another entirely to be read out of the Tribe. The old women didn’t have the right to do it – to threaten me with ex-communication from my people – but they didn’t know that and neither did I. So I backed off my atheism to agnosticism. It’s much easier to say “I don’t know” than to try to prove a negative anyway.

    Over time, a number of things just seemed to resist logical explanation – water witches were my particular peeve – and over time, they seemed to grow and grow; folks who tell the future were particularly bothersome. So, I dreamt up the idea of a “probability timeline” (a concept that should explain itself, but is excellently explained in a science fiction series, the Animorphs, which I discovered courtesy of my kids years later) with folks who could read that timeline being the ones using more than the standard 10% of the brain most of us use. That explained the water-witches and the prophets and I was happy being a Jewish nationalist (I’ve always been proud of being a Jew) and an agnostic again.

    Well, almost. My father had a friend who keeps the commandments, and his faith was something I wanted – and didn’t understand. At the time (my mid twenties), it all seemed so simple-minded, too simple-minded to be the real thing. But it was.

    The catch is that you have to actually feel G-d’s presence. Intellectual formulations just do not do the trick. you can intellectualize all day long (many Jews, religious or not, fall into this trap) and never actually sense or feel G-d’s presence. The woman who was to be my second wife does.

    It was really embarrassing. She had learned almost nothing of Judaism – neither the laws, nor the customs, nor the language(s) – but she knew the one thing I did not know about – she sensed G-d around her like a warm blanket. That was more than all that I knew or thought I knew, and I had enough brains to realize it. So, bit by bit, I taught her about the practices of being a Jew – the outer shell, so to speak – while I learned the essence of it all from her.

    When we had kids old enough for us to send them to “Hebrew School”, I had picked up enough understanding of faith to realize that major parts of the Torah I had bought – ostensibly to answer my kids questions if they had them – were prophecy. I could see the Jewish history etched in the lines, revealed to Moses and our people millennia before they actually happened. My faith journey has gone on from that understanding.

  • Baronius

    Oh, no no no no no. Don’t tell me that BC vaporized my last comment.

    I’ll try to duplicate it:

    Ruvy, please don’t take offense that I didn’t ask you about your journey. You’ve been candid about it before, and I had a pretty good idea of most of your comment #240. Silas, on the other hand, has alluded to his path but has never been specific.

    Silas, I described my own journey because you implied that certainty is a sign of spiritual immaturity. I believe in the value of an open mind, but the purpose of an open mind is to eventually close on something.

    Irene, I hope I’ve never accused you of anti-Catholicism. You’re right that the framework is only a part of one’s life of faith, but it’s like the ingredients in a recipe. The right ingredients don’t guarantee success, but the wrong ingredients can put a cap on one’s potential success.

    I cut and paste this comment somewhere else, and click “post comment” -

  • Baronius

    and it worked! Yay!

  • http://delibernation.com Silas Kain

    If I implied that certainty is a sign of spiritual immaturity I’m a bit off base. In my mind, and I may very well be wrong, the journey of the spirit is an ongoing process. It has no beginning and it has no end, even in physical death. I just believe that faith tested is faith achieved. There are many levels of “testing” so to speak. One can be completely immersed in one’s faith, blindly accepting doctrine as if were written in stone; however, even the most devout face “tests”.

    Baronius, my journey continues. My “fall” from the Roman Church is less about Dogma and more about personalities. I questioned those who were the teachers and could not reconcile that the majority of those teachers were quite adept at telling me what I could and could not do without explaining why or practicing the same.

    I reject blind faith and find it dangerous. It all comes back to the concept of free will. God (or the Divine) has given us free will and with it comes great responsibility. In that personal journey of faith I think free will has to be at the core. For me blindly accepting that which is taught is to squander the gift of free will.

    Ironically it was that which is written in Matthew 7 which propelled me into this active journey. In making this comment I returned to the New Testament and came across this passage from Matthew 6:

    Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. Anyone who breaks one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

    I point this out for a reason. Many times I have alluded to the concept that Christ’s fulfillment of Scripture made Judaism obsolete. Today I realize that I am wrong as Christ clarified that He did not come to abolish the old Laws. So even in this insignificant moment for most, I found the answer to a question.

    That’s a test, Baronius. I have “seen” the answer before me countless times yet I did not see it and today not only do I see it, but I understand as well. Ironically, and many won’t like what I’m about to say, what I digested in Matthew 6 bolsters Ruvy’s side of the debate insofar as the existence of the Jewish state. It also supports my belief that we (America) need to step back and take ourselves out of Middle East affairs. Arabs, Jews and Christians in the Holy Land need to seek their own answers without our so-called assistance.

  • Kevin

    Silas–It’s unfortunate you cannot handle a rational debate. It’s also very unfortunate that you think a church dictates to me what I shall believe.

    In one’s free will, it’s the preponderence of the evidence that dictates beliefs, but not if raw emotions get in the way like Ruvy and others on this thread.

    For you to say that I have not put Faith to the test is presumptuous at best. Reams of evidence throughout history have been there for the inquiring mind.

    For over 50 years I have been on a religious journey, and Catholicism wins, hands down.

    That’s why even Baronius makes the fatal mistake that my perceived ‘swagger’ is obvious from my writings. It’s confidence, and belief that I’ve made the right decision with all the evidence that’s out there.

    It’s also obvious that you, and people like Ruvy, have not gotten all the available info. That raw emotions rule your decisions. That you’re still wanderers, looking for truth but refusing to accept it.

    You calling a halt to this dialogue shows me just how immovable you might be to any future info. I feel sorry for you. My ‘vision quest’ began 50 years ago. So far, no information I’ve received refutes my undestanding.

    Ruvy’s words that I have tried to ‘sell’ him on Catholicism proves his emotional blocks. I hope you’re not as hard-hearted. He may know some info, but it seems so confined to a narrow subject area. The words I used to describe his reactions are well founded.

    God’s words and actions were never so one could ‘blindly’ accept a faith. He countlessly showed numerous times what the correct way should be. It’s up to us to accept it or reject it, which we are all free to do.

  • zingzing

    the problem, kevin, is that your beliefs lead you to some really ugly opinions. you certainly do make catholicism look very unattractive. i’ve met some catholics that make it seem like a loving, fulfilling set of beliefs, but you travel on a far different road than they do.

  • http://delibernation.com Silas Kain

    Ugly opinions attract ugly people.

    I dunno, zing, Kevin’s steadfast faith is very Templaric and Illuminati-like. Leads me to believe that perhaps he does possess some of the answers we seek. Dems dat scream da loudest hab sumthin to hyde.

  • Irene Wagner

    No, Baronius, you never accused me of being anti-Catholic. But I worry about being misunderstood sometimes, maybe too much. Thanks for the reminder about wrong ingredients (heavy unnecessary things that make the cake fall, and trip us up!) and here’s a related belated happy All Saints Day verse: that I’m glad your comment brought to mind. And I’ll say goodbye for now.
    Hebrews 12:1-2

  • Baronius

    Irene, you also probably worry about table manners at a pie-eating contest. You’re such a girl. :)

  • Mobius

    Without attempting to stomp all over the faith of the believers in here, let me make one, glaringly obvious, thing clear. Firstly, the catholic church has a history of perversity, religious and racial intolerance. Case in point: World War Two, catholic priests aiding the Germans in rounding up Jews. Funny thing that, cos in order to be a Jew, your mother has to be a Jew. Jesus was Jewish… any arguments there? Know where I am going? Right. Mary, who catholic adore etc etc etc was therefore also a Jew. So throughout history, catholics have been actively involved in the murder of Mary’s descendants… interesting point huh? Oh and I thought sodomy was a sin… hell of a lot of so called up standing members of the catholic community out there using choir boys for more than just singing duties eh? Lastly, let me pose a question for all you pro lifers. Your daughter is walking home/to college/ wherever when a man in a mask drags her kicking and screaming off the street and brutally and repeatedly rapes her without a condom on. He gets your daughter pregnant and moreover your daughter and future grand child have AIDS because the rapist was himself infected (funny how the one thing (and don’t talk about abstinence, it has been shown over and over and over again not to work) that can prevent the march of AIDS ie the condom is a sin according to the catholic church). So what do you do? Do you allow the child to be born even though he or she is the product of rape? What does your daughter think? At least the rapist was following the tenets of the catholic church… and if you decide or allow your daughter to have an abortion does that mean that you are going to go to hell? Will you force your daughter to have the child to save her immortal soul? Or do you turn to the people that do the devil’s work as you put it and allow her an abortion? I would love to know.

  • Kevin

    Zing–You’re going to have to let me know what I do that makes the Catholic Faith unattractive.

    The problem is Zing, you like to assume too many things…

  • Kevin

    Mobius–First, let me make one glaringly obvious staement here. All the obvious farces that were done in history were not done by Catholics. They were done by people who claimed to be Catholics, but were not.

    Catholic priests did not round up Jews in WWII. Where’d you pull that one from?

    The same for the rapist following tenents of the Catholic Church. You make that one up too? No matter what happens, no abortion should take place. Did the unborn commit a felony? Why should they be aborted?