| Author |
Topic:
Catholicism
|
DeJade_Vu
Registered:
Jul '02
|
Date Posted:
8/2/06 4:29pm
Subject:
RE: Catholicism
|
Why can't they devote themselve to prayer and a spouse?
Darth Facetious gave a very good answer to this. Plus, a nun's spiritual spouse is Jesus Christ.
I have three friends who are nuns, and five who want to become nuns. Might I mention that they are the happiest and most contented people I know?
-----signature-----
I'm a PBS mind in an MTV world. ~Eschew Obfuscation~ Pope Benedict XVI Owns You I want it--I want my phonecall. --the Joker Mara Jade Forever 
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Sauntaero
Registered:
Jul '03
|
Date Posted:
12/22/06 10:51pm
Subject:
RE: Catholicism
|
Less and less priests in the world....
Speaking of celibacy and devoting one's life to God, wouldn't it make more sense to let celibate women become priests before allowing priests to marry?
I just don't get it.
-----signature-----
I just hope I'm around to see the day the New Republic catches up with you.
Whether they give you a medal or just shoot you--either way, it'll be a terrific show.
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
dizfactor
Registered:
Aug '02
|
Date Posted:
12/23/06 1:38am
Subject:
RE: Catholicism
|
Sauntaero posted:
Less and less priests in the world....
Speaking of celibacy and devoting one's life to God, wouldn't it make more sense to let celibate women become priests before allowing priests to marry?
I just don't get it.
Well, the decline in vocations seems to be largely an American and European phenomenon. The Church seems to be inclined to fill the gaps with what a lot of commentators are calling "reverse missionary" work: priests from Africa, Asia, and South America being posted to parishes in the US and Europe.
-----signature-----
"Play is going to be for the 21st century what steam was to the 19th century."
Julian Dibbell
"You gotta love an elite killing force that you can fool by putting on a hat."
Gryph
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
KnightWriter
Title:
Administrator Emeritus
Registered:
Nov '01
|
Date Posted:
12/23/06 8:25am
Subject:
RE: Catholicism
|
That has apparently happened at my own parish, where a priest from Africa was installed to take the place of several priests who left.
I wouldn't really know personally, as i haven't attended mass in about a year.
-----signature-----
"May you live all the days of your life"
"The Obama Car will be fueled by FISA amendments and emit civil liberties for exhaust." A-B
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Darth_Overlord
Registered:
Jul '01
|
Date Posted:
12/23/06 12:34pm
Subject:
RE: Catholicism
|
Sauntero posted:
Less and less priests in the world....
Speaking of celibacy and devoting one's life to God, wouldn't it make more sense to let celibate women become priests before allowing priests to marry?
I just don't get it.
married priests and women priests often get grouped together, but they are really categorically different.
Priestly celibacy is a matter of discipline, so it can be changed at any time. In fact, it's not even universially held. Only Latin Rite Catholic priests are required to be celibate, and even then there are exceptions. Eastern Rite Catholic priests can be married. So are certain converts (Anglican ministers becoming Catholic priests are sometimes given a dispensation). One can argue that allowing priests to be married would help alleviate the priest shortage, but the data shows otherwise, as Anglican, Eastern Rite, and Orthodox are all having shortages of priests as well. And even if the rule was changed, if someone was unwilling to give up married life back when it was compulsory, how strong is his vocation to the priesthood to begin with?
A male-only priesthood, on the other hand, is a matter of doctrine, not discipline. It's not that women priests are not allowed, but that there can be no such thing as a woman priest. It is part of the Apostolic Tradition which can't be changed by anyone, not even the pope if he so desired. John Paul II wrote on the subject in the Apostolic Letter Ordinatio Sacerdotalis, and then-Cardinal Ratzinger as head of the CDF responded to queries that this is meant to be taken as infallible by the Universal Ordinary Magisterium.
-----signature-----
"The whole modern world has divided itself into Conservatives and Progressives. The business of Progressives is to go on making mistakes. The business of the Conservatives is to prevent the mistakes from being corrected."
-G.K. Chesterton
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Cael-Fenton
Registered:
Jun '06
|
Date Posted:
1/31/07 6:06am
Subject:
RE: Catholicism
|
Hope no one minds a new n00b upping this. 
I have a rather trivial question: Is it 'wrong' or disrespectful in any way to wear the rosay around your neck – not for decorative purposes, but just because? I've seen quite a few people do that, and I was just wondering if that is 'allowed'.
I noticed this tends to happen especially when the rosary has some emotional value attached; for example, a rosary given by the Pope.
-----signature-----
Let us remember our Burmese dead.
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Darth_Overlord
Registered:
Jul '01
|
Date Posted:
2/3/07 8:27am
Subject:
RE: Catholicism
|
|
The link probably answers the question better than I could: http://www.jimmyakin.org/2006/01/wearing_rosarie.html
-----signature-----
"The whole modern world has divided itself into Conservatives and Progressives. The business of Progressives is to go on making mistakes. The business of the Conservatives is to prevent the mistakes from being corrected."
-G.K. Chesterton
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Cael-Fenton
Registered:
Jun '06
|
Date Posted:
2/4/07 4:45am
Subject:
RE: Catholicism
|
|
Thank you for the link Darth_Overlord.
-----signature-----
Let us remember our Burmese dead.
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
LordSilvertouch
Registered:
Apr '03
|
Date Posted:
2/18/07 10:38am
Subject:
RE: Catholicism
|
I'm an evangelical atheist  but i'm not going to start argument here. I was just wondering, i have a question for any Catholics, or in fact any Christians at all, and it ties into the rosary discussion.
What is your opinion of the induction of the crucifix as a status symbol on jewelry? As in many non-religious people wear them in a hypocritical way, and isn't the pure use of it as jewelry hypocritical even for a religious person?
-----signature-----
Obi-Wan's Checklist:
Darth Maul - Diced.
Jango Fett - Hunted.
Grievous - Pwned.
And it ain't even lunch time.
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Darth_Overlord
Registered:
Jul '01
|
Date Posted:
2/18/07 12:04pm
Subject:
RE: Catholicism
|
|
There was an article by an organization with ties to the Vatican that said very much the same thing. I don't mind if it is particularly ornate, but it should be a holy reminder of faith for the person wearing it, not just a piece of jewelry.
-----signature-----
"The whole modern world has divided itself into Conservatives and Progressives. The business of Progressives is to go on making mistakes. The business of the Conservatives is to prevent the mistakes from being corrected."
-G.K. Chesterton
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
darthdrago
Registered:
Dec '03
|
Date Posted:
2/18/07 5:20pm
Subject:
RE: Catholicism
|
I personally don't mind when someone wears a crucifix as a 'fashion statement', but I do think it looks kind of clumsy and shallow when worn by someone who doesn't consider themselves Christian or devout. I say this because wearing the cross could lead other folks to think you're practicing the faith, and therefore they could make (mis)judgements of you for it. Yes, being judgemental is the problem of the other person doing the judging, but it's a reflexive reaction that we all engage in at one point or another.
If someone wore the Star of David or the Crescent & Star purely because they like the way it looked as a fashion accessory, other people might naturally think that person was Jewish or Muslim, because those symbols are so heavily identified with practicing those respective faiths. (And that's not even including what practicing Jews & Muslims themselves might think if they saw non-believers wearing those symbols...)
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Cael-Fenton
Registered:
Jun '06
|
Date Posted:
2/25/07 3:33am
Subject:
RE: Catholicism
|
LordSilvertouch posted:
What is your opinion of the induction of the crucifix as a status symbol on jewelry? As in many non-religious people wear them in a hypocritical way, and isn't the pure use of it as jewelry hypocritical even for a religious person?
There is a difference between a cross and a crucifix. A crucifix is more elaborate in that it has the figure of Jesus on it. What you are probably seeing in most jewellery designs is likely to be a cross in most cases. I have only ever seen the crucifix on Christian items, and even then, they were usually Catholic ones. I personally feel that while the crucifix is an exclusively Christian symbol, and, to a great extent, even a largely only Catholic one, the cross is not. For example, it is the most easily recognisable symbol of the International Red Cross. That said, there are no other major religions which use the cross as a visual signal, and as such, it does perturb me when I see it used on various 'secular' things for purely decorative reasons. But it has become quite widespread, and I suppose I can live with it.
Darth_Overlord posted:
it should be a holy reminder of faith for the person wearing it, not just a piece of jewelry.
Yes, what Darth_Overlord said. Many of my Catholic friends wear a crucifix around their neck, and I myself received one from my parents upon the occasion of my Confirmation. It helps me focus during prayer, and it helps to remind me that I am a Catholic and should think, speak and behave like one.
-----signature-----
Let us remember our Burmese dead.
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Espaldapalabras
Registered:
Aug '05
|
Date Posted:
2/25/07 4:44am
Subject:
RE: Catholicism
|
|
As a Mormon, I have never quite understood the cross and crucifix thing. As one of the few Christian denominations that doesn't use that symbol, we explain it by asking if your son was shot if you would carry around a little gun to remember him by. As a missionary in a predominately Catholic country the only people I baptized were Catholics. We didn't try to bash the Catholic beliefs, but it was always somewhat funny when the ex-Catholics would go off and be pretty harsh because we would kind of have to settle them down and tell them to be nice.
-----signature-----
A vote is like a rifle: its usefulness depends upon the character of the user.
Theodore Roosevelt
We should be eternally vigilant against attempts to check the expression of opinions that we loathe.
Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr.
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
darth_paul
Registered:
Apr '00
|
Date Posted:
2/25/07 5:44am
Subject:
RE: Catholicism
|
The idea of the crucifix as a "symbol" is probably a relatively recent development in the scheme of things. I haven't made any effort to verify this, but I'm sure it has its origins in medieval (and probably pre-medieval; I can just talk about medieval because that's what I know) devotional practices. It was a big thing, for instance, to meditate on Christ's passion, to contemplate his suffering. One way of channeling that kind of experience was through the use of devotional imagery; you might concentrate on a painting or engraving of the passion in an attempt to come closer to an understanding and an experience of the scene. I am sure the crucifix has its roots in the same tradition.
I can name one literary work off the top of my head that underlines the potential present in such devotional images. In the Shewings or Revelation of Julian of Norwich (the Revelation of Love is an early account of the experience; the Shewings a later version that expands and explains things so much that it can basically be thought of as a separate work), Julian, is lying in bed, thinking she is dying. (There's a complicated setup for all this that I won't get into; I'd encourage you to read Julian, as she's quite interesting.) A priest comes and holds a crucifix before her; the rest of the room seems to go dark, until the crucifix is all that she can see. Then the crucifix begins to bleed, and she experiences a series of visions; early visions in the sequence include seeing the passion. Whether or not one goes in for bleeding icons and celestial visions, the point it makes about the power of focusing on an image like the crucifix is striking.
So with the idea of the crucifix, at least in earlier use (I don't know how most Catholics, or most Christians in general, would view the crucifix) it wouldn't be like carrying around a gun image to remember your son; it would be like focusing upon a representation of a gun in order to invoke, imagine, and come closer to experiencing your son's shooting. Although that particular idea would be silly in a way in which invoking the passion is not.
If I had to hazard a guess about the cross, my surmise would be that it grew out of the representational tradition of the crucifix, but I really don't know, and wouldn't state that with much confidence, certainly. If anybody could talk about the roots of the cross and its early use, I'd be very interested.
-Paul
-----signature-----
So this is how liberty dies... with thunderous applause.
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Darth Mischievous
Registered:
Oct '99
|
Date Posted:
2/26/07 2:56am
Subject:
RE: Catholicism
- Date Edited:
2/26/07 3:01am (1 edits total)
Edited By:
Darth Mischievous
|
Espaldapalabras posted:
As a Mormon, I have never quite understood the cross and crucifix thing.
This may be of some help:
1 Corinthians 1: 22-24
For indeed Jews ask for signs and Greeks search for wisdom; but we preach Christ crucified, to Jews a stumbling block and to Gentiles foolishness, but to those who are the called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God.
Also, this article, Archæology of the Cross and Crucifix, may be informative.
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
