Pentecost marks the foundation by the Holy Spirit of Christ’s Church here on earth. In his letter to the Galatians, St Paul lists the fruits of the Spirit:
2 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, 23 gentleness, self-control. Against such there is no law. 24 And those who are Christ’s have crucified the flesh with its passions and desires. 25 If we live in the Spirit, let us also walk in the Spirit
This comes after a list of the works of the flesh
19 Now the works of the flesh are evident, which are: adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lewdness, 20 idolatry, sorcery, hatred, contentions, jealousies, outbursts of wrath, selfish ambitions, dissensions, heresies, 21 envy, murders, drunkenness, revelries, and the like; of which I tell you beforehand, just as I also told you in time past, that those who practice such things will not inherit the kingdom of God.
Let us consider, in humility, which set of attributes we, as Christians, exhibit on vexed issues such as the recent referendum in Ireland. That our society is awash with evidence of the works of the flesh is clear enough; but are we, as Christians, awash with the fruits of the Spirit?
In an era when communication was never easier, mutual understanding seems further away than ever. How quickly ‘discussions’ become ‘arguments’ in which the effort to understand the other is abandoned in favour of a closed insistence on our own point of view. The very frequency with which the word ‘dialogue’ is invoked is, I suspect, simply evidence of its absence in reality: digging trenches, erecting the intellectual equivalent of barbed-wire, and then lobbing explosives at one another are all fruits of the flesh – and when we fall so quickly into that mode, we perhaps fail to reflect the fruits of the Spirit; and if we do not exhibit them, who will?
Western Christians need to come to terms with the reality of our situation. We do not even ask the question which our opponents ask – why should the State favour the views of one part of the population at the expense of the “rights” of another?’ So used are we to assuming the State is ‘on our side’ that we do not ask why concepts such as ‘marriage’ and even ‘mother’ should be defined as we define them; it has always been so, it makes sense. But it does not make sense to some of those who do not hold our views, and when they ask the State for ‘equality’, the State is rather perplexed as to why it should not yield to their cries. We can stamp our little feet, we can go to the secular courts for redress, but the first makes us look pathetic, and the second is a route to failure; secular courts will go with secular laws.
Here is where Geoffrey Sales has an excellent point. The reliance on the State which has been a part of Christian life in the West since the time of Constantine is over. The Churches have, over the years, succumbed to the temptations of power, and much of what our opponents throw at us comes from that. We can complain all we like when the power of the State is turned against us, as we see it, but others simply see old wrongs being righted and a privileged caste complaining. Down that road lies nothing but further disappointment – as well as some of the fruits of the works of the flesh.
The impotent fantasies of a few Catholic monarchists apart, the days when the State felt an obligation to uphold the truths of the Christian faith have gone, and no one can foresee how or when they will return. We have a voice in the public square, and we can use it to defend our liberties – but as long as we persist in the claim that the State should protect our views on things such as marriage against the views of others, we shall sound unconvincing.
In this country we made a great fuss about marriage, but, with the exception of Catholics and some non-Catholics, we’ve made far less of a fuss about the killing of infants in the womb, and when it comes to issues such as fornication and even adultery, we have been a trifle on the quiet side – again, allowing our opponents to hurl a convincing charge of hypocrisy at us, arguing that we are obsessed with homosexuality. They have a point, their sin is only one of those St Paul singles out. We can jump up and down all we like and call it one of the sins that cries out for vengeance – and we sound more and more like ISIS in the ears of those who have no idea what we are talking about, but do not like the sound of it. What is the point of criticising the secular world for its views when the Church does nothing about those within its ranks who have misled their flocks. If bishops and priests who failed to follow the teaching of the Church, like Catholic politicians who do likewise, suffer no sanction, then we have come a long way from the days when St Ambrose excommunicated an Emperor until he repented of his ways. There is some sound sense on this subject here.
The choice is ours. We either concentrate on getting our own house in order, on good catechesis and good practice in the parishes and in our own spiritual lives, or we continue to ignore these things which are essential if we are to bear the fruits of the Spirit, or we demand that an indifferent State fulfil (to it) an out-dated conception of its duties. For sure, it is easier to do the latter, but I wonder if it is not better for us to concentrate on the former? The State will still be there, those who believe that having it legislate for them will find, as we have, that that is no path to real happiness – or the blossoming of the fruits of the Spirit. If we provide an example of what it means to be Christian which is even half as convincing as the early Christians did, we may yet have something which the world will be willing to listen to; it certainly needs it.
Servus Fidelis said:
It makes one wonder if we have concentrated on the wrong target for our ‘new evangelization’ and our push for ‘ecumenism’. Maybe we should have tried this out within our own house first.
I see that the CofE is grappling now with the idea of re-baptising those who have changed their gender. You can’t make this stuff up. Reality is more odd than science fiction used to be.
LikeLiked by 1 person
chalcedon451 said:
If we’d done a better job with our own people, I think we would not be where we are now. The failure in catechesis is a gigantic self-inflicted wound. If we can stop doing that, it would be a good start/
LikeLiked by 1 person
Servus Fidelis said:
It didn’t help that in the Catholic Church we had no approved catechism for almost 30 years. We are now seeing the results of what the parents were taught in their non-appoved catechesis.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Bosco the Great said:
You keep going back to this catechism.The catechism has failed us. We have the bible, but western society is still voting for gay marriage. You seem to think telling someone not to be gay should work. I was never told not be be gay. I didn’t even know about that stuff until I was around 12. Your catechism hasn’t stopped anything.Your own holymen don’t even care about it.We have the bible, and if one cares to ignore it, that’s on them. I heard , yesterday, that there is some pastor of some church here in the states, that told a young boy that homosexuality will send him to hell. The preacher was openly against homosexuality. One of his congregation saw his profile in some dating .site called Grinder.He was looking for males to have sex with. Well, the info was passed around and he was fired. He knows the bible. It doesn’t stop one from following one desires.
LikeLike
chalcedon451 said:
When I refer to ‘catechesis’, I don’t meant teach them the Catechism as such. It is a shorthand way of referring to religious education. If we don’t teach children about the Bible and the faith, they grow up into adults who know nothing and can’t teach their kids. A couple of generations of that have brought us to this pass.
The question of how we turn the tide has to begin with schools – and the Catholic Church has a lot of schools – my call is for it to start in its own backyard before telling others to clean up their backyards.
LikeLike
ginnyfree said:
Did our little Bosco actually write this????? “The catechism has failed us.” Ummmmmm……….excuse me Mr. Clowny Face, but you aren’t supposed to even read it let alone take it seriously enough to claim it is a failure. Does this mean you’ve actually read it or perhaps own one? What????? God bless. Ginnyfree.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Bosco the Great said:
Good question good sister. I was really just quoting good brother Servus who was saying the catechism isn’t working. Ive read snipets of it. You know, about 90% of catholic teaching I and other Christians and the bible agree with. Its the 10% of man made stuff that I don’t agree with.
LikeLike
Rob said:
Only 10% Bosco! I’m concerned over a bit more than that – maybe you had better check your salvation you seem to be slipping. Ha ha.
Good to see you are still here.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Bosco the Great said:
iM TRYING TO BE NICE.
LikeLiked by 1 person
theophiletos said:
You’re entirely right that knowledge alone (whether of the Bible, or of theology, or of doctrine) does not bring salvation or holiness. That was the mistake of gnosticism in the early days of Christianity, and it is a very easy mistake for educated Christians today to slip into. Only Christ saves, and only the Holy Spirit changes hearts.
BTW, I appreciate the change of tone. Thank you. =-)
LikeLiked by 1 person
chalcedon451 said:
Very true. We are also not using Catholic Schools to catechise. We can begin to change things close to home – then we’d be in a better position to preach to others. At the moment, we’re like the builder advising people to fix their roofs when our own roof is missing.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Servus Fidelis said:
. . . and we no longer have the ability to use or to know the purpose of a hammer and a nail. I wonder if we will get some tradesmen raised up in the Vatican that might know something of how to do this?
LikeLiked by 1 person
chalcedon451 said:
There are plans in some quarters here to begin to do something about it – at the moment below the radar, but if anything comes of them, I’ll let you know 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
Servus Fidelis said:
I’m literally all ears, my friend. 🙂
LikeLike
chalcedon451 said:
As I say, for the moment, this is under the radar – but I hope to have real news by the next academic year 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
Servus Fidelis said:
Please keep me apprised. I for one am tired of simply being critical: something positive needs be done eventually that we can fully support.
LikeLiked by 1 person
chalcedon451 said:
I’ve sent an email to your gmail address 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
theophiletos said:
Thank you for the post! I appreciate the generous spirit of it. If we think these days are hard, they’re nothing like the days of Nero, Domitian, Decius, or Diocletian, for which we can be glad. While I agree that (almost) all churches need more solid instruction and more discipline, it’s hard in a culture that presumes “church” is an activity you do for one hour on Sunday mornings. We’re called to faithfully fulfill our ministries (and to look for creative ways to do so better!), but it’s also important to remember that God in his mercy can bypass our failures. I found that out when he grabbed my life somewhat abruptly, and from the hints of your story which I’ve heard here, I suspect you know something of the same. Of course, God’s extraordinary grace does not excuse people from failing to fulfill the roles to which he has called them, but it does mean that we can still praise him and rejoice in his kindness to us, anyway! (Now I’m still praying for my parents, two of whom are lapsed Catholics and the other two lapsed Protestants…)
LikeLiked by 1 person
chalcedon451 said:
Yes, I think we recognise something of the same phenomenon in each other; God does indeed bypass our failures and work through us, even though we may be reluctant and amazed he would use us!
There is a good point in the question Bosco has raised, about what it means to ‘know Jesus’. This may be at the heart of some of the communication problems I mentioned in the post.
LikeLike
Grandpa Zeke said:
When I first started becoming acquainted with Catholics about ten years ago, I was surprised and a little disappointed to discover that my new-found friends shrugged their shoulders in indifference to their bishops and popes. These were Catholics who attended Bible study (where I met them), daily mass, adoration, and were involved in various ministries and outreach projects in the diocese. In other words, they were faith-filled, ardent Catholics who basically ignored the church hierarchy. While it still kind of outrages me to even write that, I have to admit that I now understand it. Power and money corrupt.
Many bishops and popes were and are good faithful servants, but some are not. The good news is that we do not place our faith in men. (All Catholics and reasonable people know that.) Instead, there is this wonderful thing within Catholicism called “the deposit of faith.” No amount of corruption born of power and wealth can corrupt or corrode that deposit which, I firmly believe, flows from Christ Himself into the Church. This is our golden treasure, the faith inspired by the Holy Spirit and handed down through the ages through holy men and women (ie the saints). It is recorded in Church history, in the Church fathers and Doctors of the Church, and in the Catechism.
This is my belief, my faith, that is fed daily by the presence of Jesus Christ within His members. I will fight and die defending the treasure “where neither moth nor rust destroys” (Mt 6:19-20). Or so I hope and pray, anyway. I will not fight or die, on the other hand, for weak men or women who put their faith in earthy goods and temporal rewards of power and prestige. I will pray for them, though.
In case anyone is interested, more about the deposit of faith can be read here: http://www.catholicfaithandreason.org/the-deposit-of-faith-and-the-holy-spirit-of-god.html
LikeLiked by 1 person
chalcedon451 said:
Good thoughts, Zeke. Part of the difficulty is that because our bishops so often behave like politicians, we pay them much the same regard as we do politicians.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Grandpa Zeke said:
Exactly.. And I failed to say at the outset that I agree with your post completely, expresses exactly what I have been thinking these past days.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Steve Brown said:
C, you have hit the nail on the head with this thought.
LikeLiked by 1 person
ginnyfree said:
Hello Grandpa Zeke. Thank you, thank you, thank you. Love it. Glad you’re among us. God bless. Ginnyfree.
LikeLike
Grandpa Zeke said:
Thank you Ginny.
LikeLike
NEO said:
First, outstanding link. My only difference is mostly with his note: If one is to have discipline on doctrine, even more if one is to claim it as infallible, one must discipline it, and so punishment in ths world must be levied. I do not mean physical such as what the church used to impose, but those who say (and do) outside the agreed doctrine must not be allowed to speak fot that church. That mostly applies to the Roman church, who has so many throwing rocks in the house, for the rest of us, mostly we’ve already knocked the house down.
We all have a tactical problem here, we are not going to win by being against this and that. We have started to turn the abortion debate in the US because we are no longer anti-abortion but pro-life and mand more apply the label anti-life to the opposition. But we have an advantage in that debate, we can argue it on secular, constitutional grounds just as forcefully we can on Christian grounds. SSM is not suseptible to that .
In fact, I’m not sure there is a valid secular argument against SSM, and when we are dealing with a secular government, that means we lose. In fact, I must admit that it always struck me as pecular, that Utah was forced to drop polygamy to become a state. I just never could see the constituional grounding of that.
We do have a valid argument about the state forcing us (and our churches) to participate, if we have the clear cut doctrine, like Rome does, many of our churches have compromised that out of existance.
But on the main issue, we have to stop depending on the state, and chatechize our people properly, as C alludes, this is how it was pre-Constantine, and so it is now, and in large measure,, it’s nobody’s fault but our own. If we live the life Christ taught us, what the state does is mostly irrelevant, except where it infringes our rights, and that is a winnable battle.
LikeLike
Servus Fidelis said:
I agree with one added caveat: that secular society give us the ability to ‘opt out’ of their secular teaching for our children . . . sex-education and the like have cut the parents and the church out of the equation. Today the options (especially for the poor) to a different education is largely non-existent. Whether you want to expose your child to this culture or not you have no choice in the matter. My solution: withdraw public funds for education and make it a business. We pay for what we want and support what we want; vouchers could be given to the poor for their education (which would be the only public funded resource for education). At this moment in time, we are slaves to the secular powers without any recourse unless it comes from our own pocket.
LikeLiked by 2 people
NEO said:
I agree with that. The state does have an interest in education but, it has prostituted that to become indoctrination rather than education. For the moment, i would look either to charter schools, parochial schools or home schooling, most places in the US (at least) at least one should be available, and it would be good if our churches could find ways to make it more available. The first step is to return it to local control, where the people have far more input.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Servus Fidelis said:
One needs only to look at the interviews of college kids today to see that they have been taught literally nothing about history, literature, government, logic, geography etc. But they know sex issues . . . we see the priority and we wonder why kids are having a hard time finding work and why they no longer go to church, vote (thank goodness), or think of marriage or children as an important step in their lives. Social engineering has taken place and we don’t seem able to put a stop to it. Either that or it doesn’t interest us enough to oppose it.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Steve Brown said:
What I really think we need to solve all of these problems is a cheeseburger without cheese. 7pm tonight.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Servus Fidelis said:
That would make me and Fred feel a little better. Fred wants a new Pope.
LikeLike
NEO said:
No real answers from me, although I note that we’ve always had wastrels, and if one looks one can find kids very like we were, and I think they’re increasing. I think a lot of it is that we are not letting (or requiring) them to take responsibility for their actions, so why should they rationally care?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Servus Fidelis said:
Responsibility, shame, sorrow for behavior. . . they have no ability to process such thoughts.
LikeLiked by 1 person
NEO said:
Who knows/ They’ve never bees asked to, it seems. That’s why the world of work so mystifies them. We’ve coddled them far too much.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Servus Fidelis said:
Methinks it is just the opposite, my friend. We have ignored them too much and let the errors of the secular world run amok over them. But then, they now have recourse against their parents . . .
If you correct your child or spank a child (God forbid) they can call Child Protective Services. Children have more rights than the parents today . . . except, of course, the unborn as it suits their agenda.
LikeLiked by 1 person
NEO said:
There’s problems there too, of course. In large measure they all extend from abrogating our responsibilities to the government, how we recover them, I surely don’t know but we’d best find a way.
LikeLiked by 1 person
theophiletos said:
College students may have been taught all kinds of useful ideas from history, etc., but that doesn’t mean they retained it… You shouldn’t always blame the teachers. Society has made teachers’ jobs much harder these days.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Servus Fidelis said:
In the US the meddling of teachers unions, standardized testing, affirmative action and a host of other regulations has ruined the profession of teaching and run many a good one from their ranks. Society is obviously part of the problem Schools no longer punish and a single disruptive, drug addled student, can ruin an entire class for the year. They don’t have a means to deal with them properly. Its total pandemonium . . . though where in the country you are and the school district your in might be as different as night and day. I venture in the inner city of Detroit or Chicago you will learn practically nothing.
LikeLike
Rob said:
My experience of Catholics:
First mum was a Catholic. She never attended church and whenever I tried to speak to he about the Lord she said “I don’t believe in God I hate him”.
You see she had lost a girl child that was very young which had been born out of wedlock and lost her only other female child when I was about 6. I found out many years later that she though these events were God’s punishment for her sin.
I had a family load of Catholic cousins that I hardly ever met but later in life learnt they were very sincere and particularly so one of their husbands who was a convert to Catholicism.
Growing up through school and college up to the age of 21 not one of the Catholic school/college associates I met had any interest at all in church or apparent love for Christ and there were few others of any denominations who did.
If this is in anyway typical it says to me that the priority for the Catholic Church is the evangelisation of those masses who are its members in name only.
As a rough guide, reflecting what Bosco has said about catechism I would add evangelism targets the heart and the will and an individual’s commitment to Christ as Lord. Whereas catechism is more of an educational and formation process that will only be effective, whatever its form, for those with a prior commitment to Christ.
The need is for the ministry of evangelism to introduce Christ to the people, prior to that of teaching and this ministry requires the gift of the evangelist to equip and stir the church to the task.
This for all hid faults is I believe what Bosco attempts to accomplish when he says Jesus is knocking at the door.
I may not be using terms as used by Catholics but I suspect you can gather how I think your efforts should be directed.
LikeLiked by 1 person
chalcedon451 said:
I entirely agree, Rob. What we (that is the educationalists among us) can do is to provide material for those who teach in Catholic schools which emphasises both good doctrine and some of the things you emphasise here. It will be a bit of a haul, but with the help of the Spirit, all things are possible.
LikeLike
Rob said:
Here in Barbados friends of mine have run the Alpha Course which was been significant in introducing a Catholic couple to a more personal & vibrant relationship with the Lord. This couple now runs the course for their church. Alpha starting as you probably know in the Anglican Church has been a great example of cross denominational evangelism.
I would be interested in how many at ATTWT have had any experience in using Alpha or similar materials for evangelistic work in or out from their churches. Or if there are any here that would be interested in developing familiarity with such to enable them to engage in such ministry.
LikeLiked by 1 person
chalcedon451 said:
I know that Jessica did. She used the new ‘Pilgrim’ course and found it useful.
LikeLike
Rob said:
Yes I was aware of Jessica’s use of the New Pilgrim course and the fruit that came from it. For greatest effectiveness the course material (whichever is selected) requires someone using it with faith in the power of the gospel and a leaning towards the appropriate spiritual gift-ings. Such a person can become infective and
communicate their enthusiasm and abilities to others in the church. Things may then really start to advance when an evangelistic community has developed with good Back-up, mentoring and oversight.
There are agencies and individuals that support such church development.
LikeLiked by 1 person
chalcedon451 said:
Very true Rob – there’s much we can learn from you and others.
LikeLike
ginnyfree said:
Rob, I honestly think it will be a case of hindsight being twenty twenty. I am all for ecumenism, but this Alpha thing isn’t good for Catholics and my instincts say give it a wide berth. I seek my spiritual nourishment in good Catholic sources. Sorry if I offend, but it is “Just Be Honest Day” around here. God bless. Ginnyfree.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Rob said:
I did not only mention Alpha but also other evangelistic materials. Have you actualy read through an Alph Manual or any other materials like ‘Exploring Christianity’ or the ‘New Pilgrim Course’
LikeLike
ginnyfree said:
Rob I use Montfort and St. John of the Cross and a few others. I have no need of a “program” to help be find Christ. He isn’t lost and He’s everywhere I am. I find myself in Him. He loves me. We got a thing goin’ on………and on……..and on……..and on………………………God bless. Ginnyfree
LikeLiked by 1 person
Rob said:
Good for you Ginney but that was not my question I asked if you had actually reviewed materials that you had criticised.
Besides the purpose of these materials is to assist believer in introducing those who know not Christ to him, which includes many who may say they are Catholic or C of E or some such thing but seem to have no care for Christ at all. For example C of E for many was no more than a box they used to tick on official questionnaires. Now many do not even profess that much. Such people need evangelising and the percentage of believers who actually engage regularly in this ministry across all denominations is pitifully small.
If you do so I praise and congratulate you. This work which has been a priority for a lifetime and from being a child. I think having a Catholic mother that hated God for whom I was very concerned was used by God to form me with a constant concern for all those I get to meet who have yet to find our ‘not missing Lord.
LikeLike
theophiletos said:
I’ve never been through an Alpha course, but I’ve looked a little bit at the material and heard very good things about it. Another course, more narrowly concerned with the reliability of the gospel accounts of Jesus, is the Christ Files, which I enjoyed.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Rob said:
In what ways if any, are you involved in evangelism?
I can understand from your perspective your difficulty in seeing open theists as allies. I take a very broad view that sincere believers are often a lot better than their theology and count all those who love the Lord as allies. On my last trip to UK the church I attended was Calvinistic but enjoyed good fellowship with the folk.
LikeLiked by 1 person
theophiletos said:
I’m not formally involved in evangelism, so much as “this little light of mine.” Before I moved a year ago, I was involved in trying to organize open discussions between Christians and non-Christians of difficult questions of mutual interest (such as what our responsibilities to the environment are, or how Muslims and non-Muslims can live together in peace), but I ran out of time for those with finishing up the PhD and caring for my wife. I like to get a drink with non-Christians and talk about God, Jesus, and the Bible whenever I can (you might pray for one such discussion tonight, if the topic turns that way). In my seminary days I tried street evangelism a couple times, and it was miserable. (You may not guess it from these comments, but I’m actually something of an introvert.) But I do try to live and to love in ways that point the people around me to my Savior, and to “always be prepared to give an answer” (1 Pet 3:15). =-)
LikeLiked by 1 person
Rob said:
I like your response ‘theo’ and the idea of the discussions you mentioned. Factors like the environment and animal welfare are often overlook by Christians but it is part of our responsibility and realising so enables us to engage with a particular concerned section of society.
I usually find initial contact with strangers difficult but once conversation begins I’m at ease – I think over many years I have grown through more introvert behaviour somewhat. I think I have missed the opportunity to pray for your meeting but will pray for you more generally in your efforts to witness for Christ. Thanks for the reply.
LikeLike
theophiletos said:
The discussions sometimes worked well and sometimes didn’t. US society these days often presumes not only that everyone has made up their mind, but also that I know what you’re going to say, so I don’t have to listen (or even show up) if I disagree. I think another limitation was a tendency on the part of the Christians picking the topic (including me) to select topics we thought non-Christians ought to be interested in (will there be a resurrection, what is the nature of love) rather than what actual non-Christians were interested in.
You haven’t missed the opportunity to pray for my meeting; I said “tonight” relative to when I suspected you’d be reading the comment. =-)
LikeLiked by 1 person
Bosco the Great said:
if THEY DONT KNOW jESUS.q they are lost. You can religion all you want. But you wont have Jesus.
LikeLiked by 1 person
chalcedon451 said:
That is the point Rob is making, and is, a good one. It is one which raises the question of what it means to ‘know Jesus’. That might be a good one for a post – see how playing nice works for us all – well done!
LikeLike
Bosco the Great said:
Well, I would say thanks, but I don’t want a pat on the back. Im not worthy.
LikeLiked by 1 person
chalcedon451 said:
None of us are Bosco, we’re all sinners. But your question has helped us all focus on something very important indeed. A really good contribution – for which many thanks.
LikeLike
njb4725 said:
I think we ought really to be sharing resources on these matters. I know of a few gay (but not practicing) Protestants who have very good theology and psychology for teaching in churches. Catholic dioceses ought to invite them to speak on the proviso that material be reviewed first to avoid anythng that might contradict Catholicism. This could be very amicably achieved…and it would go some way to addressing sectarianism in Ireland.
LikeLiked by 1 person
chalcedon451 said:
A very good suggestion, Nicholas.
LikeLike
ginnyfree said:
oi. I’m getting knocked about a bit over at Catholicism Pure and Simple over this very issue! Oh phooey. They don’t like me much. God bless. Ginnyfree.
LikeLiked by 1 person
chalcedon451 said:
I shall pop in and take a look.
LikeLike
ginnyfree said:
Here’s the link: https://catholicismpure.wordpress.com/2015/05/24/the-irish-referendum-personal-implications-for-catholics-public-actions/ be warned they were out for my blood! God bless. Ginnyfree.
LikeLike
Bosco the Great said:
Ahhh, don’t give that site a second thought or what they think of you. All they do is pat each other on the back and gibber jabber about their religion. Next time you go in there, tell them Bosco says “Hi”
LikeLike
ginnyfree said:
Most excellent essay Chalcedon! Wish I’d spent some more time here instead of over at CP&S. 😉 God bless. Ginnyfree.
LikeLiked by 1 person
chalcedon451 said:
Thanks ginny – just popped over to CPS – Jabba is Jabba, as they say. He was here fir a while but found some scruple known only to him to go away. 😏
LikeLike
ginnyfree said:
Seriously – save this one for the book. Okay? God bless. Ginnyfree.
LikeLike
ginnyfree said:
I think he went off the rails when I cited Trent against his him. Oh well. Some men think they are all that and never make mistakes.
LikeLiked by 1 person
chalcedon451 said:
Yes, he’s a self-proclaimed expert!
LikeLike
Bosco the Great said:
If you want to get under good brother jabbas skin, tell him Bosco is your hero.
LikeLiked by 1 person
ginnyfree said:
Oh Bosco, my real hero is Torquemada. He’d have loved to have twisted your little red nosey off and made you screamed “uncle” till you confessed you love chocolate bunnies in your Easter basket.
LikeLike
Bosco the Great said:
Good brother Torquemada is one of my favorite catholics.
LikeLiked by 1 person
ginnyfree said:
Maybe I should tell him Tomas de Torquemada is my hero! 😮
LikeLiked by 1 person
chalcedon451 said:
Yes, he’d approve. I’m told he’s a perfectly nice chap – but never seen any evidence for it.
LikeLike
ginnyfree said:
Kinda like Jabba the Hutt is a warm and fuzzy kinda critter? God bless. Ginnyfree.
LikeLiked by 1 person
chalcedon451 said:
Yes, something like that. He wasn’t very nice to Jess – and on her own blog, when she was nice as pie to him.
LikeLike
ginnyfree said:
Well then, I don’t feel a loss for having been slapped a bit by him. Ah well. I can make it all go away by simply turning off the ‘puter. See ya tomorrow! Thanks for ht excellent essay. It really is a keeper. God bless. Ginnyfree.
LikeLike
NEO said:
Ah, Ginny, long ago I watched Jess and Jabba get into a long (50+) comment, over several posts, disagreement, on the Trinity, of all things. It ended not long after I made the coldest, and most disagreeable comment I’ve ever made here caling him out on his personal attacks, I was supported with a comment from Kathleen at CP&S, by the way. From what I’ve been told, Jabba had a personal revelation (in some ways like Bosco’s) and his views, stated with amazing assurance, can be unconventional from either a Protestant or Catholic viewpoint. if I recall, we were rather relieved when he decided that because we wouldn’t agree with him, on every point, he was bound to quit commenting here. I don’t recall many lamenting the decision loudly.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Bosco the Great said:
I got to know jabba for years in Damiens crucible. Hes a decent guy, even though he has always hated me
LikeLiked by 2 people
Bosco the Great said:
VATICAN CITY (AP) — The Vatican’s secretary of state has called the Irish vote to legalize gay marriage a “defeat for humanity.”
Cardinal Pietro Parolin said he personally was saddened by the landslide decision, in which more than 62 percent of voters in the Roman Catholic country voted “yes,” despite church teaching that marriage is only between a man and woman.
In comments to reporters Tuesday evening, Parolin referred to remarks by the Archbishop of Dublin, Diarmuid Martin, that results showed the church needed to do a “reality check.” Parolin said the church needs to acknowledge the reality “but in the sense of reinforcing its commitment to evangelization.”
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/05/27/ireland-gay-marriage-vote_n_7449120.html?ncid=txtlnkusaolp00000592
I have to sneeze…..AAAhhhhhhhCardinal OBrienCCCHHhooooooooooooooo
LikeLike
Bosco the Great said:
I need someone to explain to me, how a man who is a raging flailing homosexual, rise to the rank of a cardinal in the CC system.
LikeLike
chalcedon451 said:
In much the same way, alas, as a lying Arkansas governor’s wife can be a candidate for President after having been Secretary of state. I assume whoever you mean covered their tracks well enough and sent emails by private server. In other words, in this fallen world, these things happen.
LikeLike
Bosco the Great said:
I was thinking of cardinal Obrien. Everyone knew he was a raging homo, but yet, he became a cardinal. he didn’t cover his tracks.
The CC is issuing statements on how horrible it is for Ireland to legalize same sex marriage. Ill bet $1,000,000 the priest who penned the outrage was himself a homo.
Its too late to say that a few sinners have crept into the pure and white CC. Its never ending. Heres the latest entry into the pink palace hall of fame;
Warren Hall was removed from his post at Seton Hall after he posted a Facebook message supporting the anti-bullying message of the NOH8 campaign. Now he opens up for the first time since his removal, coming out publicly as gay.
(Warren Hall is a catholic priest)
http://www.outsports.com/2015/5/26/8663051/gay-priest-seton-hall-warren-hall
Come on….its one after another.
LikeLike
chalcedon451 said:
On O’Brien, if you knew he was homosexual before the scandal emerged, you know more than most of the British press did. Despite what you say here, he kept it remarkably well-hidden. I have no doubt there are others, but where you fall over – and in my view into a want of Christ-like behaviour – is this insistence that they all are. I know several dozen priests, and not one of them, to my knowledge, is homosexual.
LikeLike
Bosco the Great said:
OK, heres where the new Bosco comes in. We are all on our way to hell. being homosexual is no worster than me. But why are so many CC priest gay? Ill tell you why…..because its a religion of images and works. Its holymen will be of this world. televangelists are also as bad as wild beasts. The answer is….ask Jesus to show himself to you.
LikeLike
chalcedon451 said:
That is a better way of expressing it than your usual way. But ket us look at this from a Biblical point of view. I think you would agree that when he was writing to the Galatians and to the Corinthians, he was writing to the saved saints, and yet what dies he say to them? He scolds them for the way the works of the flesh still have a hold on some of them.
So, if those saved by Paul and the Spirit, had bad eggs among them, why be surprised that churches now have the same problem? This is where I think you need to work more on St Paul’s letters and see that despite what you think, those who have been saved can slide back. Why else did St Paul write in that way to saved people?
LikeLike
Rob said:
Bosco I would agree with you generally with what I see of tele evangelist and what I found out about a few.
However I knew one tele evangelist very closely as a friend. My wife and I met him before we knew he had a TV programme every day in California for one hour. We invited him to speak at an event for us and gave him no cash just to see if he would come a second time to help something we were doing he did.
Then we arranged for him to come to UK each year for 2-3 weeks to speak at different venues, there was never any guarantee of what people would pay him and even though this was his full time work he never asked about that. We went to many small groups that could not afford to support his work much but he never asked us to arrange bigger events.
I stayed with his pastor in Modesto for six weeks preaching in different churches, his pastor had a good report of him as a genuine man. I visited my friend’s home and family and found that he lived in a modest home. We were with him after a meeting in Wales a week before he travelled to Alaska to preach. He died on the return trip to Modest.
My whole point here Bosco as other have tried to tell you about Catholic priest is not all priest are gay – not all tele evangelist are fake.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Pingback: Ireland, Two Kingdoms, Enlightenment, Christ, and Equality | All Along the Watchtower
Pingback: Saint of the Day for Wednesday, June 3rd, 2015: Saint of the Day for Wednesday, June 3rd, 2015 | euzicasa