What do Irish Catholics actually believe in?

tony_soprano

Seachmall wrote: »

You don't have to be gay to observe the absurdity of the situation, and you don't have to be straight to wave it off.

To expand the situation to even more absurd lengths I think it's ridiculous to believe a loving God created us as humans, loves us as humans, but will punish us for acting as humans.

its redicolous to believe in a loving god on many levels , the whole premise of belief is built on a threat , love me unconditionally or else

dvpower

I Heart Internet wrote: »

Untrue generalisation. But, heh, whatever....

Are there exceptions I'm not aware of?
Does the RCC teach that some unrepentant gay people aren't destined for hell or do they disagree with God's policy on the issue?

I Heart Internet

Seachmall wrote: »

Are there Catholics who disagree with God when he sends unrepentant gay people to hell?


(Genuine question.)

I would say yes. The church includes loads of people who don't believe homosexual acts are sinful (I think this was part of the jist of this thread.....that many catholics don't believe everything the catholic church teaches).

I've never met a single person (and never want to) who takes pleasure in believing that any person whatsoever would go to what we describe as hell. That's my point - we're all sinners and dependent on God's mercy to decide what happens after we die (if you believe that kinda thing). My guess and fervent hope is that hell either doesn't exist or is a very, very, very uncrowded place.

prinz

Penn wrote: »

I never said it itself was a problem.........

Penn wrote: »

No, but there is the whole problem of a gay person participating in the events of an organisation.............

OK. Sounds like you're saying it IS a problem that a gay person would participate/attend mass.

Penn wrote: »

There's nothing wrong with being gay. There is something wrong with being gay (as in engaging in homosexual activity) and supporting an organisation which says you're evil for doing so..........

Blah, blah, blah. Judging people for making a free choice as an adult. Don't worry gay folk, the Pope Penn is here to save you from yourselves, and from doing something that is just wrong.

Seachmall

I Heart Internet wrote: »

I would say yes. The church includes loads of people who don't believe homosexual acts are sinful (I think this was part of the jist of this thread.....that many catholics don't believe everything the catholic church teaches).

I've never met a single person (and never want to) who takes pleasure in believing that any person whatsoever would go to what we describe as hell. That's my point - we're all sinners and dependent on God's mercy to decide what happens after we die (if you believe that kinda thing). My guess and fervent hope is that hell either doesn't exist or is a very, very, very uncrowded place.

I'm having trouble grasping that, it just doesn't sit right with me.

I assume most, if not all, Catholics believe God is a just god (I think that's a fair assumption), right?

But if they disagree with his sending of unrepentant gay people to hell they presumably feel it's unjust (if it's not unjust then why disagree?).

How are those two things reconciled? They seem contradictory to me.

Pace2008

I Heart Internet wrote: »

I think there's some truth to that but catholic morality has always been subject to local interpretation and mores. For example, the social mores of a roman catholic in Bavaria would be very different to those of a catholic in maybe Sierra Leone or Peru.

We're not talking about regional idiosyncrasies, we're talkign about people blithely ignoring entire swathes of Church instruction when it goes against their independently derived notion of right and wrong. Whether it's in Dublin or darkest Peru, I question the accuracy of the "Roman Catholic" label when people do not take instruction on how to live their lives from from the Catholic Church in Rome.

Because the Catholic Church is a ridiculously wide and broad tree with many, many branches. The phrase itself - catholic, I'm sure you know, means something along the lines of "in general" often used as meaning "universal" or broad.

An yet, if it's Roman Catholicism we're referring to here, it has a core set of beliefs that are supposed to be applicable across the board. Core beliefs a la carte Catholics do not think apply to them provided they're good people and have a vague notion of a higher power and a life after this one.

Also, flawed as it is, the RCC does have a direct, traceable, historical connection to the person of Jesus and the first pope Peter. Unity and tradition, although scoffed at by some, are important to many people.

I appreciate this even if I'm not an advocate of tradition for tradition's sake. From my experience of weddings and Christenings, however, they are not spiritual Catholic ceremonies so much as get-togethers in a Church-owned building before a big meal and, as often as not, a pissup . It makes a farce of the whole thing. Roman Catholicism, the religion and worldview, and Roman Catholicism, the modern-Irish cultural phenomenon, are becoming so detached from each other that it seems inaccurate to include the two under the same label.

Penn

prinz wrote: »

Penn wrote: »

There's nothing wrong with being gay. There is something wrong with being gay (as in engaging in homosexual activity) and supporting an organisation which says you're evil for doing so..........

Blah, blah, blah. Judging people for making a free choice as an adult. Don't worry gay folk, the Pope Penn is here to save you from yourselves, and from doing something that is just wrong.

Tell me, is your friend a sinner? Is he going to Hell?

prinz

Penn wrote: »

Tell me, is your friend a sinner?

Everyone is, bit of a redundant question.

Penn wrote: »

Is he going to Hell?

Couldn't tell you one way or the other.

lazygal

prinz wrote: »

Everyone is

Speak for yourself. I've had a chat with Jesus and he's told me I'm perfect just the way I am.

prinz

lazygal wrote: »

Speak for yourself. I've had a chat with Jesus and he's told me I'm perfect just the way I am.

Good for you.:)

dvpower

lazygal wrote: »

Speak for yourself. I've had a chat with Jesus and he's told me I'm perfect just the way I am.

That was just some Spanish bloke.

riclad

Most use the church for weddings,funerals,90 per cent of schools are catholic so they use the schools in the area.
I suppose women use the church for weddings,its a big day, glamorous ,nice venue for wedding photos.
I reckon there,s maybe 5 per cent real catholics,
follow catholic teachings,on sex before marriage ,contraception ,divorce etc
I ,D say 5 per cent go to confession,mass every week ,
the rest are pretend catholics ,its a social thing.
For most people the church views ,on contraception ,divorce are just not realistic ,people dont live life that way.
How many couples are having 5 or 6 kids nowadays?
ITS like the irish language, people say its part of our culture,only a tiny minority actually speak irish fluently
or speak it outside the school gates.
Going to a wedding or funeral in a church does not make you a catholic.

cartell_best

I'm Catholic and a gay man and I just wanted to say that I stopped listening to what a man on a pedestal was preaching every sunday morning because he may have done a lot worse things in life than you or I. I don't go to mass and I pray every day without fail. I believe in God but do not believe in the one dimensional teachings of the church. Over hundreds of years the church has lost what "God" is about. The church is a business and political party now.

The church dictates that God is the creator, but the church seems to believe that this very broad statement relates to just one spieces of life, us!... It would be quite arrogant to think this but the church as we see it is the ultimate in arrogance itself. This planet we are on is in effect a grain of sand in the entire universe of what we can comprehend as existence. I believe we as humans cannot fathom or begin to try to understand different levels of existence outside of our intellect. Intelligent design may very well exist

Sorry, I didn't want the above to sound like the ravings of a mad man, far from it...I just want to attempt from my opinion to validate a widely misconceived teaching of the "men" of the church, not God. The Catholic church as I know it, does not in any way represent what I believe to be what God is. The Catholic church is always telling us to give God what he wants!?!?!... not what he needs.

If you're a good person, you know it and the choices are there as the greatest gift from my opinion given to any person is free will. It's up to us on how we interpret this. I don't need to go to mass to have my beliefs. I don't need the Catholic church telling me what is wrong and what is right as I believe enough to know they do not represent what is good and what is right.

Thats my two cents worth!

Penn

cartell_best wrote: »

I'm Catholic and a gay man and I just wanted to say that I stopped listening to what a man on a pedestal was preaching every sunday morning because he may have done a lot worse things in life than you or I. I don't go to mass and I pray every day without fail. I believe in God but do not believe in the one dimensional teachings of the church. Over hundreds of years the church has lost what "God" is about. The church is a business and political party now.

The church dictates that God is the creator, but the church seems to believe that this very broad statement relates to just one spieces of life, us!... It would be quite arrogant to think this but the church as we see it is the ultimate in arrogance itself. This planet we are on is in effect a grain of sand in the entire universe of what we can comprehend as existence. I believe we as humans cannot fathom or begin to try to understand different levels of existence outside of our intellect. Intelligent design may very well exist

Sorry, I didn't want the above to sound like the ravings of a mad man, far from it...I just want to attempt from my opinion to validate a widely misconceived teaching of the "men" of the church, not God. The Catholic church as I know it, does not in any way represent what I believe to be what God is. The Catholic church is always telling us to give God what he wants!?!?!... not what he needs.

If you're a good person, you know it and the choices are there as the greatest gift from my opinion given to any person is free will. It's up to us on how we interpret this. I don't need to go to mass to have my beliefs. I don't need the Catholic church telling me what is wrong and what is right as I believe enough to know they do not represent what is good and what is right.

Thats my two cents worth!

Now that's what I'm talking about.

Penn

prinz wrote: »

Everyone is, bit of a redundant question.

If we're all sinners, what's the point of religion? Why worship something which creates us to be born with sin, to continue to sin, and to go to Hell if we sin? Why worship a God like that?

prinz wrote: »

Couldn't tell you one way or the other.

In your opinion then, what do you think the Church would say? Do you think the Church would say that your friend is going to Hell for continuing to sin?

stanley 2

after the revolution in russia the comunists got one of there best talkers to give a talk to the people to convince them there was no resurection after death he gave a great talk then a priest got up and simply said Christ is risen the people answered Christ is risen indeed allaluia debate over

Manach

In response to the OP, whatever the doctrine of the Church is instead of whatever newpaper headline is being touted by the press.

cartell_best

cartell_best wrote: »

I'm Catholic and a gay man and I just wanted to say that I stopped listening to what a man on a pedestal was preaching every sunday morning because he may have done a lot worse things in life than you or I. I don't go to mass and I pray every day without fail. I believe in God but do not believe in the one dimensional teachings of the church. Over hundreds of years the church has lost what "God" is about. The church is a business and political party now.

why are you catholic so
the anglican churches or some of the other ones might suit you better

Nodin

Manach wrote: »

In response to the OP, whatever the doctrine of the Church is instead of whatever newpaper headline is being touted by the press.

.....must be a small group then so.

OldNotWIse

That:
1. If something good happens, it's "God's miracle".
2. If something bad happens, it's not God's fault because he "gave us free will" - ffs :rolleyes:

krudler

Penn wrote: »

If we're all sinners, what's the point of religion? Why worship something which creates us to be born with sin, to continue to sin, and to go to Hell if we sin? Why worship a God like that?

the christian god is like an abusive husband, i only punish you because I love you, but if you love me back and worship me I'll forgive you etc. sin is a man made concept, nothing more. its for keeping people in check during the dark ages and villifying women for tempting all us virtous men with their lustful ways. its still prevalent in society which in the 21st century is beyond ridiculous. we can put men in space and still base morals on a book written in the bronze age.

OldNotWIse

cartell_best wrote: »

I'm Catholic and a gay man and I just wanted to say that I stopped listening to what a man on a pedestal was preaching every sunday morning because he may have done a lot worse things in life than you or I. I don't go to mass and I pray every day without fail. I believe in God but do not believe in the one dimensional teachings of the church. Over hundreds of years the church has lost what "God" is about. The church is a business and political party now.

The church dictates that God is the creator, but the church seems to believe that this very broad statement relates to just one spieces of life, us!... It would be quite arrogant to think this but the church as we see it is the ultimate in arrogance itself. This planet we are on is in effect a grain of sand in the entire universe of what we can comprehend as existence. I believe we as humans cannot fathom or begin to try to understand different levels of existence outside of our intellect. Intelligent design may very well exist

Sorry, I didn't want the above to sound like the ravings of a mad man, far from it...I just want to attempt from my opinion to validate a widely misconceived teaching of the "men" of the church, not God. The Catholic church as I know it, does not in any way represent what I believe to be what God is. The Catholic church is always telling us to give God what he wants!?!?!... not what he needs.

If you're a good person, you know it and the choices are there as the greatest gift from my opinion given to any person is free will. It's up to us on how we interpret this. I don't need to go to mass to have my beliefs. I don't need the Catholic church telling me what is wrong and what is right as I believe enough to know they do not represent what is good and what is right.

Thats my two cents worth!

+1, I'm going to hell for being a big dirty lesbian but I think I'll be in good company Far as I can see, they send all the exciting people to hell, and let all the bores and paedo's into Heaven (and no pets allowed either wtf is that about)

On a serious note, I believe we do not need someone to tell us how to pray. We do not need a "special house" in which to do it.

Perhaps I am wrong. Maybe when I die I will realise that it was more important to be a weekly altar hugger than it was to be a good, kind person but I am willing to take my chances, and I believe the latter is far more important than the former.

2ndcoming

Probably that After Hours needs new material.

krudler

OldNotWIse wrote: »

+1, I'm going to hell for being a big dirty lesbian but I think I'll be in good company Far as I can see, they send all the exciting people to hell, and let all the bores and paedo's into Heaven (and no pets allowed either wtf is that about)

hell will have Bill hicks, Christopher Hitchens, Gallileo, strippers and heavy metal music, I want to go there as well looks way more fun.

eyescreamcone

Do people really believe Mary was assumed into heaven when she died??

This doctrine was dogmatically and infallibly defined by Pope Pius XII on November 1, 1950, in his Apostolic Constitution Munificentissimus Deus.



Also what about the miracles required by would be saints?
C'mon, that should be a reality TV show!!!

tony_soprano

OldNotWIse wrote: »

That:
1. If something good happens, it's "God's miracle".
2. If something bad happens, it's not God's fault because he "gave us free will" - ffs :rolleyes:

yeah and the free will line gets trotted out even when free will doesnt even apply , free will isn an individual power

innocent people die by the thousand in a tsunami = free will

child born with HIV and with insufficent nourishment dies at a year = free will

:rolleyes:

marty1985

stanley 2 wrote: »

after the revolution in russia the comunists got one of there best talkers to give a talk to the people to convince them there was no resurection after death he gave a great talk then a priest got up and simply said Christ is risen the people answered Christ is risen indeed allaluia debate over

I'd like to think I would have sided with the priest on that one. And you should give the genuine priests involved some credit.

These debates did happen and were set up because of the pervasiveness of rural illiteracy. Atheist propaganda was reliant on the spoken word and visual images.

Debates were organised between atheists and priests, whose outcomes sometimes included the latter admitting their "deception" and dramatically throwing off their clerical costume. More often than not, the peasant audiences for these charades took the side of religion against atheism. Priests won debates with their poorly educated Bolshevik interlocutors, which contributed to the replacement in 1928 of debates by lectures where there was no opportunity to contest the message. (Michael Burleigh, Sacred Causes: Religion and Politics from the European Dictators to Al Qaeda

Such is history.

A recent video posted here before showed some FK Dynamo fans chanting "Christ Is Risen" in Lokomotiv Stadium with the opposing fans of FK Lokomotiv chanting back "He Is Risen Indeed" during the match.

marty1985

Seachmall wrote: »

I agree. So lets focus on the Catholic Church.

Does the Catholic Church have objective methods to distinguish between these genres?

Now you're getting it.

Duggys Housemate

marty1985 wrote: »

Such is history.

A recent video posted here before showed some FK Dynamo fans chanting "Christ Is Risen" in Lokomotiv Stadium with the opposing fans of FK Lokomotiv chanting back "He Is Risen Indeed" during the match.

Indeed, if you ever want Christianity to come back stronger than ever, persecute it.

marty1985

krudler wrote: »

the christian god is like an abusive husband, i only punish you because I love you, but if you love me back and worship me I'll forgive you etc. sin is a man made concept, nothing more. its for keeping people in check during the dark ages and villifying women for tempting all us virtous men with their lustful ways. its still prevalent in society which in the 21st century is beyond ridiculous. we can put men in space and still base morals on a book written in the bronze age.

When the term Dark Ages is used so pejoratively somewhere a scholarly history book dies a little bit. It's an ignorant manner of speaking about the mediaeval period. It's pushed to further some sort of myth, but is nothing more than a misleading and inaccurate for any part of the Middle Ages.

Other misconceptions such as: "the Church prohibited autopsies and dissections during the Middle Ages", "the rise of Christianity killed off ancient science", and "the medieval Christian church suppressed the growth of natural philosophy", are all cited by Ronald Numbers as examples of widely popular myths that still pass as historical truth, although they are not supported by current historical research.[51] They help maintain the idea of a "Dark Age" spanning through the medieval period.

Many historians employ common sense and avoid using the term because it seldom is understood by the common reader in a nonjudgmental way, and the centuries are not "dark" any longer in the sense that we have now so much knowledge and insight into the historical period.

Duggys Housemate

marty1985 wrote: »

I'd like to think I would have sided with the priest on that one. And you should give the genuine priests involved some credit.

These debates did happen and were set up because of the pervasiveness of rural illiteracy. Atheist propaganda was reliant on the spoken word and visual images.



Such is history.

A recent video posted here before showed some FK Dynamo fans chanting "Christ Is Risen" in Lokomotiv Stadium with the opposing fans of FK Lokomotiv chanting back "He Is Risen Indeed" during the match.

marty1985 wrote: »

When the term Dark Ages is used so pejoratively somewhere a scholarly history book dies a little bit. It's an ignorant manner of speaking about the mediaeval period. It's pushed to further some sort of myth, but is nothing more than a misleading and inaccurate for any part of the Middle Ages.



Many historians employ common sense and avoid using the term because it seldom is understood by the common reader in a nonjudgmental way, and the centuries are not "dark" any longer in the sense that we have now so much knowledge and insight into the historical period.

That, and the Dark Ages weren't that Christian anyway, it was a time of Christian retrenchment. However I am sure the Vikings and pagan Anglo Saxons were proto-feminists.

prinz

Penn wrote: »

If we're all sinners, what's the point of religion?

Something better to aim for. Or don't you find that a noble goal, relgiously inspired or not?

Penn wrote: »

Why worship something which creates us to be born with sin, to continue to sin, and to go to Hell if we sin? Why worship a God like that?

Because personally I'd say God wants something better for us than to resign ourselves to the fact that we're all sinners and keep sinning.. and for some people it's a lot easier for others. Some people can commit to a life without x, others cannot. We're not perfect, we're not instructed to be perfect or go to hell. We're told to be the best you can be.. one person's best might be a lot different to someone else's best, but as long as they're both trying the best for themselves then I don't see an issue.

Ever tried. Ever failed. No matter. Try again. Fail again. Fail better

It's a journey, not a destination. The destination will take care of itself after you're dead.

Penn wrote: »

In your opinion then, what do you think the Church would say? Do you think the Church would say that your friend is going to Hell for continuing to sin?

I think the Church would say what the Church says over all the dead... and it doesn't include anything about saying x person is going to hell rather it says something about hope and love.

marty1985

eyescreamcone wrote: »

Do people really believe Mary was assumed into heaven when she died??

This doctrine was dogmatically and infallibly defined by Pope Pius XII on November 1, 1950, in his Apostolic Constitution Munificentissimus Deus.

The implication being that we're supposed to think he just decided on it overnight in some sort of erratic manner and therefore we can't trust anything the Catholic Church say? Also on that wiki page I think you quoted is the following:

Although the Assumption (Latin: assūmptiō, "taken up") was only relatively recently defined as infallible dogma by the Catholic Church, and in spite of a statement by Saint Epiphanius of Salamis in AD 377 that no one knew whether Mary had died or not,[6] apocryphal accounts of the assumption of Mary into heaven have circulated since at least the 4th century.

The Catholic Church itself interprets chapter 12 of the Book of Revelation as referring to it.

The taking of Mary into Heaven became an established teaching across the Eastern, Western, Coptic and Oriental churches from at least the late 7th Century, the festival date settling at August 15.

The Catholic Church has not claimed that this doctrine is founded on the apocryphal accounts as having any authority, nor that the church bases its teaching about the Assumption on them, but rather on the historic teaching of the Church down the centuries, the scholastic arguments in favor of it, and its interpretations of biblical sources.

And while they do teach she was assumed into heaven, they don't specify if she was alive or dead, that's open to interpretation.

marty1985

prinz wrote: »

It's a journey, not a destination.

This always looks like something you'd read on a movie poster, like Jerry Maguire.

hardCopy

tony_soprano wrote: »

yeah and the free will line gets trotted out even when free will doesnt even apply , free will isn an individual power

innocent people die by the thousand in a tsunami = free will

child born with HIV and with insufficent nourishment dies at a year = free will

:rolleyes:

I think they fall under "Mysterious Ways"

Penn

prinz wrote: »

Something better to aim for. Or don't you find that a noble goal, relgiously inspired or not?

A noble goal, but not one which is exclusive to or inspired by religion.

prinz wrote: »

Because personally I'd say God wants something better for us than to resign ourselves to the fact that we're all sinners and keep sinning.. and for some people it's a lot easier for others. Some people can commit to a life without x, others cannot. We're not perfect, we're not instructed to be perfect or go to hell. We're told to be the best you can be.. one person's best might be a lot different to someone else's best, but as long as they're both trying the best for themselves then I don't see an issue.

Again, that's not something exclusive to religion. Don't need religion for that.

prinz wrote: »

It's a journey, not a destination. The destination will take care of itself after you're dead.

And without religion, I don't treat this life as being a journey. This is where I am. I'm not doing this and waiting to get to the real destination, I'm here. Treating this life as if it's the only one I'll ever have, and that when I die, I'm gone.

prinz wrote: »

I think the Church would say what the Church says over all the dead... and it doesn't include anything about saying x person is going to hell rather it says something about hope and love.

Well then I'm sure your friend will take great comfort in that.

marty1985

I don't know if they fall under free will or mysterious ways, but I think one of the greatest causes of skepticism today is that God allows suffering. The only reason to think we should be exempt from suffering, as it happens, is vanity. If you have evaluated your life in terms of rights and entitlements and have an unrealistic idea of human worth, so of course natural disasters and tragic deaths will cause you trouble. The simple truth as I see it is that we live in an unstable environment and take risks everyday in a world governed by material processes, but this is unacceptable to people who want exemption from humanity. (Don't Christians believe God created the universe with real material laws and human life exists within them and is subject to them?) Tsunami? We don't control the terms on which human life is lived. Sorry.

housetypeb

Liamario wrote: »

They believe whatever they are told to believe

True- Catholics are not meant to interpret the bible for themselves.

According to the Catechism of the Catholic Church: "The task of interpreting the Word of God authentically has been entrusted solely to the Magisterium of the Church, that is, to the Pope and to the bishops in communion with him...."

So they are taught what to believe and to not question authority.
Dictators could learn a lot from the catholic church about instilling blind obedience in the masses.

marty1985

housetypeb wrote: »

True- Catholics are not meant to interpret the bible for themselves.

Of course. That would be Protestantism. Or even Protestant fundamentalism. The Catholic Church believe in a thing called truth - they are not relativists. (Now, I don't believe everything they teach but I believe relativism is a disease, like Einstein believed, a social pandemic, and the less said about relativism the better.) They - like other denominations - believe the truth is the truth is the truth and is supposed to be protected, not reinterpreted by everyone individually. Whether they are right or not, they are holding to their tradition and the idea of allowing all Catholics to interpret the bible for themselves is absurdly naive.

prinz

Penn wrote: »

A noble goal, but not one which is exclusive to or inspired by religion..

Exactly why I mentioned being religiously inspired or not.

Penn wrote: »

Again, that's not something exclusive to religion. Don't need religion for that...

Again, I never said it was exclusive to religion, or that religion was needed for it.

Penn wrote: »

And without religion, I don't treat this life as being a journey. This is where I am. I'm not doing this and waiting to get to the real destination, I'm here. Treating this life as if it's the only one I'll ever have, and that when I die, I'm gone....

Good for you.

housetypeb

marty1985 wrote: »

Of course. That would be Protestantism. Or even Protestant fundamentalism. The Catholic Church believe in a thing called truth - they are not relativists. (Now, I don't believe everything they teach but I believe relativism is a disease, like Einstein believed, a social pandemic, and the less said about relativism the better.) They - like other denominations - believe the truth is the truth is the truth and is supposed to be protected, not reinterpreted by everyone individually. Whether they are right or not, they are holding to their tradition and the idea of allowing all Catholics to interpret the bible for themselves is absurdly naive.

So much for free will and having a "personal relationship" with god.

prinz

housetypeb wrote: »

So much for free will and having a "personal relationship" with god.

The Westboro Baptist Church will be glad to have your support.

housetypeb

prinz wrote: »

The Westboro Baptist Church will be glad to have your support.

What a witty catholic you are.

prinz

housetypeb wrote: »

What a witty catholic you are.

Christian. Not Roman Catholic, although with a small c you are close.

Nodin

marty1985 wrote: »

Of course. That would be Protestantism. Or even Protestant fundamentalism. The Catholic Church believe in a thing called truth - they are not relativists. (Now, I don't believe everything they teach but I believe relativism is a disease, like Einstein believed, a social pandemic, and the less said about relativism the better.) They - like other denominations - believe the truth is the truth is the truth and is supposed to be protected, not reinterpreted by everyone individually. Whether they are right or not, they are holding to their tradition and the idea of allowing all Catholics to interpret the bible for themselves is absurdly naive.

I think you might need to look into Protestantism a bit more, tbh.....

marty1985

housetypeb wrote: »

So much for free will and having a "personal relationship" with god.

I have no idea what your free will has to do with what they teach or how they interpret the bible, even ironically, how they interpret free will. You are free to reject it, are you not? And if the church having a clear and defined teaching and interpretation of the bible prevents you from having a personal relationship with God, well then as the tree said to the lumberjack...

marty1985

Nodin wrote: »

I think you might need to look into Protestantism a bit more, tbh.....

In the sense that Protestants take the primacy of the Bible as the only source of revealed truth and reject the authority of the Pope. I am not saying that they don't share a belief in "truth" but that the source of revealed truth can only come from the bible.

Nodin

marty1985 wrote: »

In the sense that Protestants take the primacy of the Bible as the only source of revealed truth and reject the authority of the Pope. I am not saying that they don't share a belief in "truth" but that the source of revealed truth can only come from the bible.

......more or less. So whats this about 'moral relativism' etc?

Owen_S

They hate Rangers, that's it really.

joseph brand

Irish Catholics are more like Protestants these days. Soon, most of them will be Atheist. Slowly but surely. :cool: