Ask a Catholic

[Solitary]

So God gave us pain and suffering so it is easier to accept our mortality. Makes sense from a God that is all loving so we can go to heaven. What? Catholicism is all about death and dying while suffering. The crucifix as a symbol of the Church is proof of that. I believe in life and reality and giving it my best shot, alone, and without magical thinking, or letting some pompous ass telling me how to live and think while interfering with my family and life. I'm not some dumb scared sheep, or cattle, waiting for death so I can be in heaven by placating some imaginary God, or gods. I have served my main purpose in life, perpetuating my species--- and staying alive the best I can in a God forsaken world of reality without imaginary figures. I came from an eternity of an unconsciousness sleep of death, and will go back when I'm dead.  Solitary

[CatholicCrusader]

well either way the world is full of suffering and all of us are going to suffer and die.  However, many people of faith who believe that their suffering is a share in the cross that sanctifies us and  atones for our sins and the sins of the world , and anticipate the glorious reward and resurrection following this crucifixion, will have more joy, peace, and hope than those who simply believe that suffering is something  that should be avoided at all costs and has no meaning.

Could a person ever become an Olympic athlete if they are not willing to suffer?

Many lessons can be learned and wisdom acquired through suffering.

Also in regard to my statement about responding to every post, I never said i would do that.  if you have a question I will try to you answer it. please let me know what your question is or if there is an earlier question that I failed to answer.

[Nam]

Also in regard to my statement about responding to every post, I never said i would do that.  if you have a question I will try to you answer it. please let me know what your question is or if there is an earlier question that I failed to answer.

I'm going to get into trouble for this but it's worth it. People refer to me as an asshole all the time but you truly are an asshole.

I'm also surprised the staff let's you stay since the only reason you are here is to convert. If you were here to debate, then you would. You wouldn't make excuses such as, "I never said I'd answer all questions posed to me.".

If you asked us questions -- we'd do our best to answer every single one.

That's the difference between us.

-Nam

[Hijiri Byakuren]

well either way the world is full of suffering and all of us are going to suffer and die.  However, many people of faith who believe that their suffering is a share in the cross that sanctifies us and  atones for our sins and the sins of the world , and anticipate the glorious reward and resurrection following this crucifixion, will have more joy, peace, and hope than those who simply believe that suffering is something  that should be avoided at all costs and has no meaning.

Could a person ever become an Olympic athlete if they are not willing to suffer?

Many lessons can be learned and wisdom acquired through suffering.

Also in regard to my statement about responding to every post, I never said i would do that.  if you have a question I will try to you answer it. please let me know what your question is or if there is an earlier question that I failed to answer.

[Bibliofagus]

The Catholic Church has an unbroken chain of Popes that dates back to Peter (2,000 years ago).

Heh. The more you know...

Pope Benedict IX (Latin: Benedictus IX; c. 1012 â€" c. 1056), born Theophylactus of Tusculum in Rome, was Pope on three occasions between October 1032 and July 1048.[1] Aged approximately 20 at his first election, he is one of the youngest popes in history. He is the only man to have been Pope on more than one occasion and the only man ever to have sold the papacy.

The Catholic Encyclopedia calls him "a disgrace to the Chair of Peter."[2] The first pope said to have been primarily homosexual,[5] he was said to have held orgies in the Lateran palace.

Benedict IX refused to appear on charges of simony in 1049 and was excommunicated.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pope_Benedict_IX

[stromboli]

TROLL.

[stromboli]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gkTb9GP9lVI

[CatholicCrusader]

I'm going to get into trouble for this but it's worth it. People refer to me as an asshole all the time but you truly are an asshole.

I'm also surprised the staff let's you stay since the only reason you are here is to convert. If you were here to debate, then you would. You wouldn't make excuses such as, "I never said I'd answer all questions posed to me.".

If you asked us questions -- we'd do our best to answer every single one.

That's the difference between us.

-Nam

read my post again. Where did I say I wouldn't try to answer every question?  I said I didn't say I would respond to every POST.  Not every post contains a question!

I'm not here to convert anybody but to speak about Catholic apologetics. I'm not telling anyone they have to believe what I do.

[CatholicCrusader]

actually there is NOTHING the Church teaches that the Pope is guaranteed to be any more holy or less of a sinner than you or I.

The President of the United States does not always act as President. No one would attribute presidential authority to his views on hunting, yachting, or drama. Even when He presides over a White House function He is not always using his presidential prerogatives. No one would attach the full authority of the United States Government to his every conviction, remark, or action. Even when speaking in a cabinet meeting, or making his official speech at the opening of Congress, he does not intend to throw the full weight of his authority into his utterances. It is only when signing an Act of Congress or a treaty withn some foreign nation, that the full and highest exercise of his Presidencey comes into play. Then, and then alone does he act as ruler of the Country, committing the Government to the deed, and binding the whole nation.

That is how it is with the Pope. In his private acts as a Christian or Bishop, or in his jurisdiction of the government of the Church, he might make a mistake or fail in prudence. No one is denying that this has and does sometimes happen. The Bishop of Rome can make any mistake but when speaking under certain conditions He is guided by the Holy Spirit (1) When He is speaking “excathedra”(from the Chair of Peter); and 2 manifests his intention of defining a doctrine 3 of faith or morals 4 officially binding the whole Church. At such a time he is assisted, watched over, by the Holy Spirit so that he does not use his authority and his knowledge to mislead the Church.The Pope is not inspired; he receives no private revelations; he does not carry in his mind the whole of Christs teaching as a miraculous treasure on which to draw at will. When preparing to make a definition in his office of upreme teacher, he first gives the matter to his theologians.

They examine the sources of the doctrine in Holy Scripture and Tradition. These sources are what is called “The Deposit of Faith”. The “deposit of Faith preserved by the Catholic Church includes:Doctrines clearly taught in the Bible, and requiring the authority of the Church to decide their true interpretation; Doctrines not mentioned in the Bible, for example: the abrogation of the Jewish Sabbath, with the obligation of observing Sunday instead; the practice of eating meat with blood, which was forbidden for a time by the Apostles.

The Deposit of Faith is the body of truth divinely proclaimed by our Lord through His Apostles for our belief. These truths of Revelation were complete at the death of the last Apostle St. John who died in the year 99Ad. These truths, which we must believe in order to be Catholics were given to us by that time. The Dogmas of the Church never can suffer change. They are today precisely what they were at the beginning of the Church. There are no new doctrines.

“The Doctrine of the faith which God revealed,” says Vatican Coucil 1(1869-1870), “is propsed, not as a mere philosophical discovery to be elaborated by human mind, but as the Divine Deposit delivered by Christ to His spouse (the Church) to be by her faithfully guarded and infallibly declared.”Whenever a Heretic challenged some revealed truth of the Faith, it became necessary for the Pope, either alone or together with the Bishops in Council, to re-express in more exact language the doctrine under attack, so that there could be no more doubt about its meaning. This defining of a Dogma does not mean a new Dogma was added to the Faith.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pope_Benedict_IX

[CatholicCrusader]

Okay so, I'll be nice. What is your opinion on this thread
http://atheistforums.com/index.php?topic=5797.0

And this thread? Really like to get your comments.
http://atheistforums.com/index.php?topic=5812.0

If it were up to me the pedophile priests and those who cover for them so that they can hurt more children, would be put in front of a firing squad and executed.

[CatholicCrusader]

I see. At least... Im not as confused.

Around here I dont think we get too many visits from you guys unfortunately; and all too often its the overtly hostile pious types.

But you seem like a nice enough guy and we might get along just fine, provided we suspend our beliefs (or lack thereof)

Still unless you think you can convince Protestants that your faith is superior with a few paragraphs, Im not sure what the point is. Does this method actually work? Are you trying to find new recruits? Do you expect Protestants will have some kind of epiphany? Its all pretty weird to me.

no I'm just sharing what I've studied about Catholic apologetics and a lot of Protestants are ignorant on the topic.  no I don't think anybody will convert because of what I say here, but in my experience, few people I come in contact with, including Catholics, know what the Church teaches.  So I'm simply providing the knowledge and having a discussion about something that interests me, on a forum that has more freedom of speech than a Christian or Catholic a forum..

[Bibliofagus]

actually there is NOTHING the Church teaches that the Pope is guaranteed to be any more holy or less of a sinner than you or I.

I stopped reading here. I responded to this claim:

The Catholic Church has an unbroken chain of Popes that dates back to Peter (2,000 years ago).

First our friend Benedict was briefly forced out of Rome in 1036, but returned with the help of Emperor Conrad II.
In September 1044 the opposition forced him out of the city again and elected John, Bishop of Sabina, as Pope Sylvester III. Benedict IX's forces returned in April 1045 and expelled his rival, who returned to his previous bishopric.
Later in 1045, in order to rid the Church of the scandalous Benedict, his godfather, the pious priest John Gratian, persuaded Benedict to resign the papacy for a sum of money, thus allowing Gratian to become Pope Gregory VI.

Sounds pretty broken to me. That Benedict liked orgies and was excommunicated was just the icing on the cake.

[Solitary]

well either way the world is full of suffering and all of us are going to suffer and die.  However, many people of faith who believe that their suffering is a share in the cross that sanctifies us and  atones for our sins and the sins of the world , and anticipate the glorious reward and resurrection following this crucifixion, will have more joy, peace, and hope than those who simply believe that suffering is something  that should be avoided at all costs and has no meaning.

Could a person ever become an Olympic athlete if they are not willing to suffer?

Many lessons can be learned and wisdom acquired through suffering.

Also in regard to my statement about responding to every post, I never said i would do that.  if you have a question I will try to you answer it. please let me know what your question is or if there is an earlier question that I failed to answer.

You just don't get it do you? Why would a loving God give us suffering, why not give us heaven in the first place?  Can't you see how silly believing in a rewarding God is that has to be placated to end suffering?

[CatholicCrusader]

I stopped reading here. I responded to this claim:

First our friend Benedict was briefly forced out of Rome in 1036, but rereturnedturned with the help of Emperor Conrad II.
In September 1044 the opposition forced him out of the city again and elected John, Bishop of Sabina, as Pope Sylvester III. Benedict IX's forces returned in April 1045 and expelled his rival, who returned to his previous bishopric.
Later in 1045, in order to rid the Church of the scandalous Benedict, his godfather, the pious priest John Gratian, persuaded Benedict to resign the papacy for a sum of money, thus allowing Gratian to become Pope Gregory VI.

Sounds pretty broken to me. That Benedict liked orgies and was excommunicated was just the icing on the cake.

what I mean by unbreakable chain of popes is there has always been a pope aside from the time that it takes to elect a new one after one step down or dies.  there were some corrupt popes but the vast majority of them were not like that.

[Solitary]

   Solitary