|
|
|
|
|
| What Kind Of Heretic Are You, Anyway?
Posted: 4/20/2008 12:27:09 PM | In the first few centuries of Christianity there arose questions about whether Jesus was divine, human, or some combination of the two. And if he was a combination, what was the relationship between his divine and human natures. If you disagreed with the Church you were branded a heretic and could be punished by excommunication, imprisonment, or death. Nowadays the Church has lost much of its power and people are more free to believe what they want. So given this freedom, what kid of heretic are you (if any)?
1) Arian: Pre-Incarnate Jesus was a divine being created by the Father.
2) Ebionite: Jesus was not divine, but a human prophet.
3) Docetic: Jesus was divine, but his physical body (and therefore his crucifixion) was an illusion. Gnosticism is a closely related heresy.
4) Adoptionist: Jesus was born fully human but was adopted by the Father and later became divine.
5) Modalist: God has three aspect (but not three distinct persons) depening on how the believer perceives God.
6) Apollinarian: Jesus was a human but instead of having a soul he had God.
7) Eutychian: Jesus' humanity was obliterated by his divine nature.
8) Monthelite: Jesus has human and divine natures, but one will (orthodox view says that he had two wills).
9) Nestorian: Jesus existed as two persons (human and divine) rather than two natures.
10) Subordinationist: The Son and Holy Spirit are eternally subordinate to the Father (this is not considered heresy in the Orthodox Church and is actually pretty widespread today).
11) Euchite: The essence of the Trinity can be perceived with the senses.
This is not an exhaustive list, so feel free to add to it. | |
|
| What Kind Of Heretic Are You, Anyway?
Posted: 4/20/2008 12:34:44 PM | - Heresies of the Second Century: Marcionites, Ebionites, Montanism, Monarchians, Tritheism, Modalism, Basidilians, Carpocratians
- Third Century: Tertullianists, Origenists, Manicheans, Millenarians, Novatians
- Fourth Century: Donatists, Arians, Macedonians, Appollinarists, Jovinians, Vigilantians
- Fifth Century: Pelagians, Semipelagians, Nestorians, Predestinarians, Monophysites
- Seventh Century: Paulicians, Monothelites (like Monophysites of the Fifth Century)
- Eighth Century: Iconoclasts, Adoptionists
- Ninth Century: Greek Schism
- Eleven Century: The Great Schism: Orthodox-Roman Catholic.
- Twelfth Century: Petrobrosians, Henricians, Waldenses
- Thirteenth Century: Albiguenses, Fraticelli, Flagellants
- Fourteenth Century: Lollards of John Wycliffe
- Fifteenth Century: Hussites, Moravians, "Church of the Brotherhood", United Brethren,
- Sixteenth Century: Protestant Reformation, Lutherans, Zwinglians, Church of England, Calvinism, Anabaptists, Episcopalians, Mennonites, Presbyterians, Puritans, Congregationalism, Huguenots, Reformed Dutch, Unitarians, Socinians
- Seventeenth Century: Baptists, Rosicrucians, Episcopalians, Quakers or Society of Friends, Universalists, Jansenists
- Eighteenth Century: Freemasonry, Shakers-Union Society, Methodists-"Holy Club", Moravians-Church of the Brotherhood-United Brethren, Unitarians, Universalism, Unitarian-Universalist Association
- Nineteenth Century: Mormons, Adventists, Jehovah's Witnesses, Spiritualistic Churches, Salvation Army, Ku-Klux-Klan, Christian Science Church, Old Catholics, Modernists, Reformed Churches, Holiness Churches, Church of God, Church of Christ, Church of God in Christ
- Twentieth Century: Pentecostal Movement, Charismatic Renewal, Snake Handlers, Worldwide Church of God, United Christian Evangelistic Association, Moonies-the Holy Spirit Association for the Unification of World Christianity, National Association of Evangelicals, Wicca, Church of Satan, Church of Scientology, Way International, Church universal and Triumphal, United Unitarian Universalist Association, Fraternity of St. Pius X, Palmar de Troya, Churches for Homosexuals, Children of God, New Age, Peoples Temple of Jim Jones, Branch Davidians WACO
- Philosophies and Religion, the Pillars of Unbelief: Machiavelli, French Revolution, Kant, Marx, Nietzsche, Freud, Sartre | |
|
| What Kind Of Heretic Are You, Anyway?
Posted: 4/20/2008 1:33:33 PM | CountIbli:
None, I profess the Athanasian Creed and am 100% Chalcedon-compliant. 
No, really, we already created the "are you a heretic quiz?" on QuizFarm.com. http://quizfarm.com/test2.php?q_id=131773
sarcasticnwitty:
Wicca, Church of Satan, Scientology, etc. are different religions entirely, so they aren't "heresies" out of Christianity in any sense (regardless of where a Christian stands on his doctrine). A heresy is a sect within the same religion which is considered disagreeable. So, a Sunni Muslim might see Shi'a Islam as a heresy, but not Christianity, because that's just a different religion entirely.
Also, the Fraternal Society of St. Pius X isn't a heretical sect, although their bishops are currently excommunicated for not being consecrated without the permission of the Pope. | |
|
| What Kind Of Heretic Are You, Anyway?
Posted: 4/20/2008 1:34:18 PM | # 12) Logicist : Jesus never existed based on the idea of mythology - a written and/or verbal story passed down in history with the lack of unbiased eyewitnesses. a.k.a. 'hearsay'.
Guess that makes me a heretic by all definitions.
Sorry.... couldn't resist.
 | |
|
| |
| What Kind Of Heretic Are You, Anyway?
Posted: 4/20/2008 2:59:57 PM | | After reading the threads about the historicity of Jesus, I wonder whether he ever existed as an actual person. If he didn't exist, there's a creative team out there much like Spidermans' creators Stan Lee and Steve Dittko, who deserve to recieve some credit and maybe even backdated royalties. | |
|
| What Kind Of Heretic Are You, Anyway?
Posted: 4/20/2008 3:19:19 PM | "Free-thinker... the best kind of heretic to be. :)"
testify my brother!
religion is tolerated insanity when you consider this.
a man walks up to you and says "i am an adult and yet i have these two imaginary friends who morally guide me and who i attempt to communicate with on a regular basis mainly sundays. they rarely if ever communicate back and their answers are cryptic at best. would you like to know their names? the first is jesus the other is god"
this was an exercise to give you perspective into how religion sounds to a an atheist like myself, no more sane then the disturbed fellow who elects captain kangaroo as his mesiah. however i'm gonna have to give props to the guy who creates his own religion from scratch over the sheep that falls in line and lacks the imagination and vision to try and see the world from a perspective all their own. i don't mean to sound arrogant, this is the best way to break it down into simplest terms. | |
|
| What Kind Of Heretic Are You, Anyway?
Posted: 4/20/2008 5:17:34 PM | The term free-thinker seems kinda oxymoronic, as all thinking is essentially "free".
To think one believes those "taken in" by religion are losing there ability to think freely seems downright silly. "Wait, I'm a free-thinker, I don't believe in God. You believe in God, you must not be a free-thinker!!1" Furthermore, if obedience to God were not a choice, I don't feel it would have any value. But, I'm not God. So I obviously can't say what does or doesn't have value to Him. | |
|
| What Kind Of Heretic Are You, Anyway?
Posted: 4/20/2008 5:49:48 PM |
The term free-thinker seems kinda oxymoronic, as all thinking is essentially "free".
I don't know about that. A lot of people have strong emotional attachments to their views, whatever they happen to be, and there's no question that this effectively limits the freedom of their thought.
But your point is well taken: being an atheist does not necessarily "free" one's mind, and there are plenty of atheists who get very anxious, even hysterical, when their beliefs are challenged. And, conversely, there are many religious people who are not like this.
I sometimes wonder if people who feel the need to describe themselves as "free-thinkers" aren't over-compensating for something, just a little bit. | |
|
| What Kind Of Heretic Are You, Anyway?
Posted: 4/20/2008 7:13:31 PM | "The term free-thinker seems kinda oxymoronic, as all thinking is essentially "free".
To think one believes those "taken in" by religion are losing there ability to think freely seems downright silly. "Wait, I'm a free-thinker, I don't believe in God. You believe in God, you must not be a free-thinker!!1" Furthermore, if obedience to God were not a choice, I don't feel it would have any value. But, I'm not God. So I obviously can't say what does or doesn't have value to Him."
well what about venal sins where you have to be asked for forgiveness simply for the act of thinking of something sinful, these are thoughts where a believer can potentially "pay a price" with eternal condemnation. i find it ludacris that if i where a devoute catholic that i should apologize for "impure thoughts". i can concede that i don't have all the answers and neither does science but you have to admit its better then making something up on the spot. but then again maybe people want to be lied to. when their is something beyond our comprehension we give it human traits so it seems less foreign for instance refering to god as a him and rarely as a her. a cosmic entity would be more of an it, wouldn't it?
have you ever considered the thought that maybe god doesn't believe in you. that maybe if their was a creator it's sight of the universe is finite at best and prehaps all sentient life could just be a byproduct of grander creations like the celestial bodies. our existence incidental.
here's a newsflash for you the universe will keep doing what it's doing even if we don't exist. if the universe where a theatre we wouldn't even be considered curtain pullers. the real players in that cosmic drama are the stars the nebulas galaxies and constellations. it's pretty naive to think we are the stars in that stage production when we are just as infinitesimal as the atoms that make up our universe. | |
|
| What Kind Of Heretic Are You, Anyway?
Posted: 4/20/2008 7:37:42 PM | LimpChimpExtreme said:
well what about venal sins where you have to be asked for forgiveness simply for the act of thinking of something sinful, these are thoughts where a believer can potentially "pay a price" with eternal condemnation. i find it ludacris that if i where a devoute catholic that i should apologize for "impure thoughts".
Ludacris is a rapper. Perhaps you meant "ludicrous".
Also, you are mistaken here. The Catholic faith makes a distinction between venial and mortal sins. A venial sin is an unintentional sin, such as an "impure thought", which misses the mark of divine perfection. There is no damnation for it, nor does it need to be confessed before a priest. A mortal sin, on the other hand, is a sin of grave matter which is committed willfully knowing that it's wrong. It is effectively declaring to God that one no longer needs or desires His grace, and so, God accepts that freely made decision to be eternally separated from Him. | |
|
| What Kind Of Heretic Are You, Anyway?
Posted: 4/20/2008 7:54:58 PM |
well what about venal sins where you have to be asked for forgiveness simply for the act of thinking of something sinful, these are thoughts where a believer can potentially "pay a price" with eternal condemnation
I'm pretty sure the idea was that venal sins did not lead to eternal condemnation, but I'm not sure because pretty much nobody uses those terms anymore.
I think it's funny when people equate religious belief in general with the unsophisticated, anthropomorphic, mythical ideas of God held by some religious people, and then, having "refuted" the former by having found fault with the latter, pat themselves on the back for being critical thinkers. | |
|
| What Kind Of Heretic Are You, Anyway?
Posted: 4/20/2008 8:40:57 PM | Ludacris is a rapper. Perhaps you meant "ludicrous".
you are right thats quite the spelling mistake on my part maybe next you'll challenge me to a spelling bee or a foot race.
and you are right again about the correct definiton of venial sin. however the idea of branding these minor tresspasses as "sins" gives a negative connotation to them and that in it's self is almost a form of thought policing which brings us back to the point of free thinking and not having to apologize for the thoughts we have.
food for thought more people have been killed by chirstianity then satanism and i will also concede that a fair number of people have been killed by athiests in stalinist russia and during mao's cultural revolution but still the body count comes nowhere near judeo-christian-islamic killings. these are the big three and they have lost all crediblity me considering the aforementioned blood on their hands. granted i can see the wisdom in the more humanistic writings but find alot of them have simply been plagiarized from greek philosophy or hinduism.
do i think the world would be a better place with out religion, no. we'd still have the same problems but maybe we'd have one less reason to kill each other.
"I think it's funny when people equate religious belief in general with the unsophisticated, anthropomorphic, mythical ideas of God held by some religious people, and then, having "refuted" the former by having found fault with the latter, pat themselves on the back for being critical thinkers."
i'm gonna have to correct you there, i was not patting myself on the back i was jerking myself off. whats wrong with being a critical thinker? your just as guilty as i'm of the same shortcomming and i admire your willingness to disagree and defend your beliefs. | |
|
| What Kind Of Heretic Are You, Anyway?
Posted: 4/20/2008 8:55:23 PM | The Catholic faith makes a distinction between venial and mortal sins. A venial sin is an unintentional sin, such as an "impure thought", which misses the mark of divine perfection. There is no damnation for it, nor does it need to be confessed before a priest.
What's this craziness? Catholics are supposed to feel guilt about sins they have no control over.  Next you're going to tell me that it's OK to eat meat on Fridays! | |
|
| What Kind Of Heretic Are You, Anyway?
Posted: 4/20/2008 8:58:38 PM | Eighth Century: Iconoclasts, Adoptionists
Where'd you get the idea that Adoptionism came into being in the 8th century? Most likely Paul and Mark were Adoptionists.
| |
|
| What Kind Of Heretic Are You, Anyway?
Posted: 4/20/2008 10:07:58 PM | limpchimpextreme said:
you are right thats quite the spelling mistake on my part maybe next you'll challenge me to a spelling bee or a foot race.
I love spelling bees.
and you are right again about the correct definiton of venial sin. however the idea of branding these minor tresspasses as "sins" gives a negative connotation to them and that in it's self is almost a form of thought policing which brings us back to the point of free thinking and not having to apologize for the thoughts we have.
But, as you say, if a thing is a "trespass", then of course it's a sin.
The Greek word in the New Testament for "sin" is hamartia, or "missing the mark", such as when an archer misses his target. In traditional Christianity, anything that doesn't meet God-like standards of perfection are sin in some way, because they all "miss the mark". It doesn't mean that a single, unintentional impure thought is going to lead to eternal damnation. That would be a caricature of a religious belief that few people actually teach as a serious matter of doctrine.
CountIbli:
What's this craziness? Catholics are supposed to feel guilt about sins they have no control over. Next you're going to tell me that it's OK to eat meat on Fridays!
What can I say? I think "Catholic guilt" is an evil stereotype that has no actual relation to the orthodox Catholic faith and serves only to discourage or lead people away from that faith.
As for the meat thing..... the 1983 Code of Canon Law stipulates that, since Friday is the day of Christ's death (disregarding the whole "Good Wednesday" argument, I've already weighed my opinion in on that thread), all Catholics are to make a token act of penance on that day in remembrance. The normative act is by abstaining from the meat of land animals (considered a luxurious food in past centuries), although the specific rules are to be determined by each country's council of bishops. The American bishops have determined that Catholics should abstain from meat on Fridays, or make another act of penance of their own choice. However, abstaining from meat is still required on Fridays of Lent as well as Ash Wednesday and Good Friday. So, it is not a sin to eat meat on normal Fridays, as long as one chooses a different kind of penance (such as extra prayer). | |
|
| What Kind Of Heretic Are You, Anyway?
Posted: 4/20/2008 10:17:40 PM | and you are right again about the correct definiton of venial sin. however the idea of branding these minor tresspasses as "sins" gives a negative connotation to them and that in it's self is almost a form of thought policing which brings us back to the point of free thinking and not having to apologize for the thoughts we have.
How about attacking thought itself? Why does conscious thought have to have syntax or language even have to make sense? Why do our thoughts have to have a form? Where do thoughts even come from? Why, there must be RULES! Call the Thought Police!
Why believe in something if you condemn yourself? (sin)
Why deny oneself the Truth to uphold a shallow human vanity?
Alas, I eat my words. | |
|
| What Kind Of Heretic Are You, Anyway?
Posted: 4/21/2008 1:55:28 PM | What can I say? I think "Catholic guilt" is an evil stereotype that has no actual relation to the orthodox Catholic faith and serves only to discourage or lead people away from that faith.
I was brought up Catholic and there was plenty of Catholic guilt. Catholics are made to feel guilty about things we have no control over (like Original Sin or the crucifixion). At least when Jewish parents make their kids feel guilty it's over things they've done! | |
|
| What Kind Of Heretic Are You, Anyway?
Posted: 4/21/2008 3:48:27 PM |
What can I say? I think "Catholic guilt" is an evil stereotype that has no actual relation to the orthodox Catholic faith and serves only to discourage or lead people away from that faith.
Whilst i virtually always admire someone for having such strength in their beliefs, i totally disagree with this comment 100%. My Father was from a large Catholic family, his mother had no more than a week after giving birth to each of her children before the parish Priest would be hammering on the door telling her she was surely evil for not yet having her child baptised yet. My Father definitely suffered from the "guilts" as i call them due to his Catholic upbringing. My Grandmother is the same. My son is Catholic (I am not) and he gets "the guilts".
The Catholic faith is full of repentance for so called "sin" such as others have mentioned, the "sin" of being born!! How awful that is eh? We are all sinners as soon as we enter the world according to the Catholic faith.
My son felt guilty because he was such a good kid (seriously he was really really well behaved) and had nothing to confess at his first Confession! | |
|
| What Kind Of Heretic Are You, Anyway?
Posted: 4/21/2008 6:24:20 PM | FoxyIsBack said:
Whilst i virtually always admire someone for having such strength in their beliefs, i totally disagree with this comment 100%. My Father was from a large Catholic family, his mother had no more than a week after giving birth to each of her children before the parish Priest would be hammering on the door telling her she was surely evil for not yet having her child baptised yet. My Father definitely suffered from the "guilts" as i call them due to his Catholic upbringing. My Grandmother is the same. My son is Catholic (I am not) and he gets "the guilts".
To me, whatever version of Catholicism people are raised is irrelevant if it doesn't correspond to the orthodox Catholic faith which is handed down from Scripture, oral Tradition, and the Magisterium of the Church (the Pope and bishops in communion with him). That is why I said "the orthodox Faith", not "the typical American Catholic experience". Those are often two very different things.
What I do know is that the Catechism of the Catholic Church, published under Pope John Paul II in 1992, states:
1784 The education of the conscience is a lifelong task. From the earliest years, it awakens the child to the knowledge and practice of the interior law recognized by conscience. Prudent education teaches virtue; it prevents or cures fear, selfishness and pride, resentment arising from guilt, and feelings of complacency, born of human weakness and faults. The education of the conscience guarantees freedom and engenders peace of heart.
Indeed, my experience with Catholicism has been completely different. When I converted to Catholicism, I was baptized in the most traditional and orthodox parish in the city: the only one that regularly offers the Mass sung entirely in Latin, the only one that still uses the old Gothic vestments, where the priest says Mass with his back to the people, the only church where Communion can be received only on the tongue while kneeling, never in the hand while standing, one of the few churches in the city where hell is still preached from the pulpit (one of those medieval crystal goblet pulpits that requires scaling an entire staircase to reach). No modern music or rock bands, only Gregorian chant or Renaissance polyphony. My priest is probably the only priest in the city who's so old-fashioned that he wears a cassock and biretta (academic cap with a pom on top) instead of a clerical suit.... although he is relatively young compared to most other priests.
And yet, despite how traditionalist we are, I have yet to experience any of this so-called "Catholic guilt".
On the contrary, the Catholicism that I read about from the Holy Father Pope Benedict XVI's encyclicals Deus Caritas Est ("God is Love") and Spe Salvi ("Saved by Hope") teaches a faith where believers rejoice in the love of God and the veritatis splendor, the splendor of truth. Or, as Benedict says in Spe Salvi:
Hiding through a spirit of fear leads to “destruction” (Heb 10:39). “God did not give us a spirit of timidity but a spirit of power and love and self-control”—that, by contrast, is the beautiful way in which the Second Letter to Timothy (1:7) describes the fundamental attitude of the Christian.
I still vividly recall my baptism and confirmation in a dark corner of my dimly lit Gothic church, with its red walls and blue star-studded ceiling. There was myself, my godfather, my best friend, the priest in splendid golden cope, and the deacon in a matching diagonal stole. The ceremony opened with these words of hope which I still remember today:
ALMIGHTY and immortal God, the aid of all who need, the helper of all who flee to thee for succour, the life of those who believe, and the resurrection of the dead; We call upon thee for this thy Servant, that he, coming to thy holy Baptism, may receive remission of sin, by spiritual regeneration. Receive him, O Lord, as thou hast promised by thy well-beloved Son, saying, "Ask, arid ye shall have; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you." So give now unto us who ask; let us ‘who seek, find; open the gate unto us who knock; that this thy Servant may enjoy the everlasting benediction of thy heavenly washing, and may come to the eternal kingdom which thou hast promised by Christ our Lord. Amen.
When it was over, I was warmly embraced by both the priest and the deacon as though I been welcomed into a new family.
Every time I go to confession, I receive consoling words of wisdom. Many life-changing experiences have resulted from a few minutes in the dark confessional booth.
My last thought on this so-called "Catholic guilt"...... in Mel Gibson's The Passion of the Christ, when the Roman soldiers are scourging Christ at the pillar, they tell Him to get up with the Latin word, "Sursum! Sursum!" This is the same word that the priest uses in the Latin Mass when, in the Preface dialogue before the Eucharistic Prayer, he sings: Sursum corda! "Lift up your hearts!" To which the people respond by singing Habemus ad Dominum!, "We lift them up unto the Lord!"
For a movie on a subject that supposedly makes people feel "the guilts" (whatever those are), when I meditate upon the mysteries of the Passion, I think about hope in the mercy and love of my God. I believe that it was through those scourgings and sufferings that mankind can enjoy eternal joy.
And if anyone was thinking that I'm making this up, I would cite the Pope's homily for the Easter Vigil just last month, where he also talks about sursum corda.
Linked with this, then, was the other exclamation that still today, before the Eucharistic Prayer, is addressed to the community of the faithful: “Sursum corda” – “Lift up your hearts”, high above all our misguided concerns, desires, anxieties and thoughtlessness – “Lift up your hearts, your inner selves!” In both exclamations we are summoned, as it were, to a renewal of our Baptism: Conversi ad Dominum – we must always turn away from false paths, onto which we stray so often in our thoughts and actions. We must turn ever anew towards him who is the Way, the Truth and the Life. We must be converted ever anew, turning with our whole life towards the Lord. And ever anew we must withdraw our hearts from the force of gravity, which pulls them down, and inwardly we must raise them high: in truth and love. At this hour, let us thank the Lord, because through the power of his word and of the holy Sacraments, he points us in the right direction and draws our heart upwards. Let us pray to him in these words: "Yes, Lord, make us Easter people, men and women of light, filled with the fire of your love. Amen." | |
|
| What Kind Of Heretic Are You, Anyway?
Posted: 4/21/2008 6:47:46 PM | [After reading the threads about the historicity of Jesus, i wonder if he ever existed as an actual person.]
i dont believe that jesus existed as a real person . I think the gospels and the other works of the new testament were the roman stage plays about a fictional religion in a society that had banned new religions. | |
|
| What Kind Of Heretic Are You, Anyway?
Posted: 4/22/2008 8:55:38 AM |
not "the typical American Catholic experience".
Well as I live in England and my Son was baptised in a Roman Catholic Church, attended a Roman Catholic Primary School and is now at a Roman Catholic Secondary School and is doing his Confirmation (again in a Roman Catholic Church), the mention of an American Catholic experience is lost on me, all I can mention is MY OWN experiences and those of my family, the ROMAN CATHOLIC way lol lol
"the guilts" (whatever those are),
From my original post on this matter I do believe it was really apparent regarding the way in which "the guilts" could be applied, attempt to belittle me by all means, i think the rest of the readers of my post would get what I meant.
in Mel Gibson's The Passion of the Christ,
A movie by an Anti-Semitic Catholic actor/director is not something that inspires me in my prayers. I do pray but use what I believe | |
|
| What Kind Of Heretic Are You, Anyway?
Posted: 4/22/2008 9:23:16 AM | I really don't care what a bunch of old guys in the past just as screwed up as the rest of us decided was Christian. I don't care if someone says they are a man or woman of GOD, prove what you're saying because I refuse to be a mindless Church zombie, so I am a rebellious Heretic I guess.
I believe we should search every matter out prove what is true and hold to it, just as the Bible instructs us. I also pay attention to the warning of false teachers, doctrines and wolves in sheeps clothing and such.
Jim B | |
|
| What Kind Of Heretic Are You, Anyway?
Posted: 4/22/2008 9:50:29 AM | FoxyIsBack:
the mention of an American Catholic experience is lost on me
I used "American" because most POF's are American. However, it can be "Italian", or "English", or "German", or "Chinese", and the point would be the same. We were analyzing my comment, which said:
'I think "Catholic guilt" is an evil stereotype that has no actual relation to the orthodox Catholic faith and serves only to discourage or lead people away from that faith.'
A local experience in an individual Catholic parish or school may or may not represent what the orthodox Catholic faith is. For example, I could go to the Catholic parish next door to my house and listen to homilies by the local (Roman) Catholic priest about why "the Pope is an evil woman-hating tyrant", or that there is no such thing as hell, or that the Latin Mass is bad, or that transubstantiation is a relic of the medieval past. Now, obviously, none of those ideas represent the orthodox Catholic faith taught by Rome.
Likewise, I say the same thing applies to Catholic priests who are too rigid, just as it does to priests who are too liberal. Neither of them represent the orthodox Catholic faith. When I read the Scriptures, or the writings of the Early Church Fathers, or the writings of the Popes, I certainly don't see where "Catholic guilt" is being taught. That's where I'm coming from.
Also:
My Father was from a large Catholic family, his mother had no more than a week after giving birth to each of her children before the parish Priest would be hammering on the door telling her she was surely evil for not yet having her child baptised yet.
From the perspective of orthodox Catholic faith, the notion that a woman is "surely evil" for not having her child baptized after less than one week is absurd. The priest in that situation was overzealous at best and a heretic at worst. However, it is a Catholic parent's responsibility to have their children baptized as soon as they are able. The Code of Canon Law states that baptism of infants should be performed within "the first few weeks after birth":
Can. 867 §1. Parents are obliged to take care that infants are baptized in the first few weeks; as soon as possible after the birth or even before it, they are to go to the pastor to request the sacrament for their child and to be prepared properly for it.
The Catholic faith is full of repentance for so called "sin" such as others have mentioned, the "sin" of being born!!
I believe this is a serious misunderstanding of the doctrine of original sin. One can't "sin" by being born; but all humans are born with a propensity, or inclination, to sin. This is demonstrated by human nature: even simple commandments to not lie, steal, or commit adultery are frequently broken, even by religious leaders. However, original sin itself is not something that can be blamed as an individual action, and not something one can "repent" of. The Catholic faith teaches that human conception and birth is a miracle, is human life is sacred from conception to natural death.
From my original post on this matter I do believe it was really apparent regarding the way in which "the guilts" could be applied, attempt to belittle me by all means, i think the rest of the readers of my post would get what I meant.
It wasn't an attempt to belittle, anymore than other comments were attempts to accuse Catholicism as officially teaching "Catholic guilt". I am an orthodox and faithful Catholic who adheres as best as I can to all of the dogmas and doctrines of the Catholic faith taught by Scripture, oral Tradition, and the Magisterium (the Pope and bishops in communion with him). I have never experienced "Catholic guilt" and I believe it's completely opposed to my faith. I can't find it taught anywhere except by anecdotes of encounters with priests in individual circumstances.
Finally:
A movie by an Anti-Semitic Catholic actor/director is not something that inspires me in my prayers.
I think that's an unfair judgment against Mr. Gibson. What a person says while he's drunk is not entirely under his free will. By judging him for that, you're effectively doing the same thing you are apparently accusing the Catholic Church of doing (judging people by things which are against their will).
Mel Gibson has stated:
"There is no excuse, nor should there be any tolerance, for anyone who thinks or expresses any kind of anti-Semitic remark. I want to apologize specifically to everyone in the Jewish community for the vitriolic and harmful words that I said to a law enforcement officer the night I was arrested on a DUI charge.
"I am a public person, and when I say something, either articulated and thought out, or blurted out in a moment of insanity, my words carry weight in the public arena. As a result, I must assume personal responsibility for my words and apologize directly to those who have been hurt and offended by those words.
"The tenets of what I profess to believe necessitate that I exercise charity and tolerance as a way of life. Every human being is God’s child, and if I wish to honor my God I have to honor his children. But please know from my heart that I am not an anti-Semite. I am not a bigot. Hatred of any kind goes against my faith.
"I’m not just asking for forgiveness. I would like to take it one step further, and meet with leaders in the Jewish community, with whom I can have a one-on-one discussion to discern the appropriate path for healing.
"I have begun an ongoing program of recovery and what I am now realizing is that I cannot do it alone. I am in the process of understanding where those vicious words came from during that drunken display, and I am asking the Jewish community, whom I have personally offended, to help me on my journey through recovery.
"Again, I am reaching out to the Jewish community for its help. I know there will be many in that community who will want nothing to do with me, and that would be understandable. But I pray that that door is not forever closed.
"This is not about a film. Nor is it about artistic license. This is about real life and recognizing the consequences hurtful words can have. It's about existing in harmony in a world that seems to have gone mad." | |
|
| What Kind Of Heretic Are You, Anyway?
Posted: 4/22/2008 10:18:18 AM | I really don't care what a bunch of old guys in the past just as screwed up as the rest of us decided was Christian.
I meant no disrepect to the Church fathers in this statement, thought it showed a lot. They were human beings just as we are, they had problems just as we do. They had motives that weren't always Christian, their cultures, education and belief's influence their vision of what was decided was to be the Christian faith.
I get carried away some times and apologize for the wording of my statement.
Jim B | |
|
|
|
Home
login 
