Pope Benedict and American Catholicism: On The Titanic's Deck

hese "cafeteria Catholics" also want the church to allow priests to marry and to admit women to the priesthood--"a move that would eliminate the priest shortage overnight."

>>I love this ignorant cliche. The Episcopal Church has both married and female clergy, yet it has just as bad of a vocations crisis as the Catholic Church.

I might add the vocations crisis is chiefly in liberal dioceses and religious orders. Tell me why the Latin Mass Fraternity of St. Peter, Institute of Christ the King and conservative dioceses have a stream of applicants for the priesthood.

Susan Jacoby is simply ignorant and narrow-minded in her own way.

What you write is naive hate literature. There are Catholic and Orthodox priests who are married with children, and I can go on at great lengths to prove you are wrong on so many points etc etc.... You are on a dangerous and erroneous tirade. Maybe you should have been in bed with Islamic terrorists. I am an atheist myself, know better and detest your lack of knowledge, incite and "hip" lambasting drivel.

Hmmm, all this OT and NT "CandPing" and thumping requires another dose of the flaw and error review in order to bring the topic back into the reality that baptizing Muslims or anyone else for that matter has no meaning because baptism has no theological meaning.

Once again the "flaws and errors in it all" for those eyes have not seen:

1. Abraham founder/father of three major religions was either the embellishment of the lives of three different men or a mythical character as was Moses, the "Tablet-Man" who talked to burning bushes and made much magic in Egypt.

And the first myth of the OT is the story of A&E. There was no magical garden, no talking snakes and no original sin to baptize away.

1.5 million Conservative Jews and their rabbis have relegated Abraham to the myth pile along with most if not all the OT.
simpletoremember.com/vitals/ConservativeTorah.htm

2. Jesus was an illiterate Jewish peasant/carpenter/simple preacher man who suffered from hallucinations and who has been characterized anywhere from the Messiah from Nazareth to a mythical character from mythical Nazareth to a mamzer from Nazareth (Professor Bruce Chilton, in his book Rabbi Jesus). Analyses of Jesus’ life by many contemporary NT scholars (e.g. Professors Crossan, Borg and Fredriksen, On Faith panelists) via the NT and related documents have concluded that only about 30% of Jesus' sayings and ways noted in the NT were authentic. The rest being embellishments (e.g. miracles)/hallucinations made/had by the NT authors to impress various Christian, Jewish and Pagan sects.

The 30% of the NT that is "authentic Jesus" like everything in life was borrowed/plagiarized and/or improved from those who came before. In Jesus' case, it was the ways and sayings of the Babylonians, Greeks, Persians, Egyptians, Hittites, Canaanites, OT, John the Baptizer and possibly the ways and sayings of traveling Greek Cynics. earlychristianwritings.com/theories.html

For added "pizzazz", Catholic/Christian theologians divided god the singularity into three persons and invented atonement as an added guilt trip for the "pew people" to go along with this trinity of overseers. By doing so, they made god the padre into god the "filicider".

3. Luther, Calvin, Smith, Henry VIII, Wesley et al, founders of Christian-based religions, also suffered from the belief in/hallucinations of "pretty wingie thingie" visits and "prophecies" for profits analogous to the myths of Catholicism (resurrections, apparitions, ascensions and immaculate conceptions).

4. Mohammed was an illiterate, womanizing, lust and greed-driven, warmongering, hallucinating Arab, who also had embellishing/hallucinating/ plagiarizing scribal biographers who not only added "angels" and flying chariots to the koran but also a militaristic agenda to support the plundering and looting of the lands of non-believers.

This agenda continues as shown by the assassination of Bhutto, the conduct of the seven Muslim doctors in the UK, the 9/11 terrorists, the 24/7 Sunni suicide/roadside/market/mosque bombers, the 24/7 Shiite suicide/roadside/market/mosque bombers, the Islamic bombers of the trains in the UK and Spain, the Bali crazies, the Kenya crazies, the Pakistani “koranics”, the Palestine suicide bombers/rocketeers, the Lebanese nutcases, the Taliban nut jobs, and the Filipino “koranics”.

And who funds these acts of terror? The warmongering, Islamic, Shiite terror and torture theocracy of Iran aka the Third Axis of Evil and also the Sunni "Wannabees" of Saudi Arabia.

5. Hinduism (from an online Hindu site) - "Hinduism cannot be described as an organized religion. It is not founded by any individual. Hinduism is God centered and therefore one can call Hinduism as founded by God, because the answer to the question ‘Who is behind the eternal principles and who makes them work?’ will have to be ‘Cosmic power, Divine power, God’."

The caste/laborer system and cow worship are problems when saying a fair and rational God founded Hinduism."

6. Buddhism- "Buddhism began in India about 500 years before the birth of Christ. The people living at that time had become disillusioned with certain beliefs of Hinduism including the caste system, which had grown extremely complex. The number of outcasts (those who did not belong to any particular caste) was continuing to grow."
"However, in Buddhism, like so many other religions, fanciful stories arose concerning events in the life of the founder, Siddhartha Gautama (fifth century B.C.):"

Archaeological discoveries have proved, beyond a doubt, his historical character, but apart from the legends we know very little about the circumstances of his life. e.g. Buddha by one legend was supposedly talking when he came out of his mother's womb.

Bottom line: There are many good ways of living but be aware of the hallucinations, embellishments, lies and myths surrounding the founders and foundations of said rules of life.

Harold, editing together random, long, vague, unconnected Bible verses accomplishes nothing. Please come to the point!

It's odd how these long-winded religious rants seem to come through fine, but a short paragraphy from the rational bounces.

To HAROLD and SPIDERMAN2:

STOP NOW this spamming and board flooding!

POST HERE objectively understandable, empirically verifiable evidence of your claims!

Rejecting Papal Infallibility only to accept the literal truth of the Bible instead seems delusional in the extreme.

Accepting that even one human ascended bodily into heaven is called falling prey to one's own misguided beliefs in the supernatural - all the while rejecting other faith-inspired and similarly held beliefs as 'preposterious and superstitious'.

Protestants, I suppose, have Martin Luther to thank for their own peculiar beliefs in the 'literal' truth of the Bible - even after he had re-written it himself in German. He was also a world-class anti-semite, believing that Jews should be expunged from Europe with their properties re-distributed to God-fearing Christians.

To imagine that the Reformation yielded anything substantively or spiritually superior to Catholicism as a form of 'faith' founded on 'more valid' truths is simply a form of self-delusion.

Old disillusioned & apostate Catholics rarely turn to Protestantism as a substitute for rejected religious fantasy - as a rule we like our mythology first-hand and from more original sources. On the other hand, everything about Catholicism & Christianity in general is borrowed from yet older religious traditions, mythologies and allegorical tales of the Divine.

Need it be said that humans and their very fertile imaginations have cooked up a potent brew of religion and religious behaviors from as far back as Neanderthal and maybe even as far back as our very early hominid ancestors, Homo Erectus.
It's in the genes folks - that's DNA to our genetics expects such as Spiderman2, et al.

However, there's no cure for the incurable, as the saying goes. We'll all be listening to this utter nonsense about the literal truth of religion for decades to come.........

TO HAROLD:

Jesus said, "I will write it on their hearts, not on stone", or something to that effect, did He not?

The computer can pump out reams of words out of the bible but they don't mean anything to the computer, do they mean anything to you?

Divine Justice and Divine Mercy go hand in hand, God's Plan will come to Fruition.

Take care, see you and the rest of humanity in the Kingdom.

Sincerely, Thomas Paul Moses Baum.

TO SPIDERMAN2:

Genesis, "I will put enmity between you and The Woman.

At the Cross, "Woman behold thy son, behold thy Mother.

In Revelations there is a reference to a Woman also, something about 12 stars and the moon.

At the Anunciation, God asked permission of Mary to become a Man and Mary said Yes.

We have free will and Mary of her own free will said YES.

By the way, Jesus said many, many things not just the ones that you bring up, do you remember the 'do not add or subtract things'?

Jesus said, "I have come into the world, not to condemn the world but that the world might be saved.", did He not?

You do not seem to have a clue what being a "Christian" is about, remember Jesus extended an invitation to, "Come follow Me", did He not? Jesus also said on the cross, "Father forgive them, they know not what they do", did He not?

So many people throughout the AD period have used the bible to judge and condemn others that it is sad, to say the least, if someone judges anyone it should be themself that they judge not others.

God's Plan is for ALL to be with Him in His Kingdom.

You don't seem to have a clue about hell either, hell is custom built by each and everyone of it's occupants and since Jesus took ALL of the sins of humanity upon Himself on the cross, He won the keys and He will use them in due time [God's Time].

Take care, see you and the rest of humanity in the Kingdom [the new heavens and the new earth].

Sincerely, Thomas Paul Moses Baum.

Here's why Catholicsim is a stupid religion. This is one doctrine in which pope pius XII used his "INFALLIBILY power". STUPIDITY TO THE MAX.

The Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary
(by : Ignatius Brady, O.F.M., Catholic University of America)

" The Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary is the Catholic belief that 'the Immaculate Mother of God, Mary ever virgin, when the course of her earthly life was finished, was taken up (assumed) body and soul into heavenly glory.' This definition of Pope Pius XII (1950), which crystallizes what the church has always held whether implicitly or explicitly, likewise indicates the scriptural basis and theological reasons of the doctrine: since God in choosing Mary to be the mother of Christ had preserved her from original sin (Immaculate Conception) and had kept her a virgin even in her motherhood, it was fitting that He grant her final victory over death by freeing her body from all corruption and bringing it together with her soul to the glory of heaven. Testimony to the universal belief in this doctrine can be traced to early Christian (Catholic) times. The feast, on August 15, certainly antedates the decree of the Byzantine Emperor Maurice (582-602) that it be celebrated throughout his empire. "

Rebuttal :

First, there is no scriptural record that Mary ascended to heaven. In the Bible, there were only three people who ascended bodily to heaven. They were Enoch (Genesis 5:24), Elijah (II Kings 2:11) and Jesus Christ (Acts 1:9)

Second , the scripture says that after the virgin birth of Jesus, Mary bore at least 6 more children ( Matthew 13:55-56). She certainly did not remain a virgin.

Third, about claims that Mary was sinless, let us hear what the apostles John and Paul had said :

I John 1:8 " If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselfves, and the truth is not in us. "

Romans 3:23 " For all have sinned and come short of the glory of God."

Even before these false teachings appeared , God already knew this coming. In Revelation 2:2 , we can read His prophetic verse, " I know thy works, and thy labor, and thy patience, and how thou canst not bear them which are evil : and thou hast tried (or tested) them who say they are apostles (RC's creed of apostolic succesion), but are not, and hast found them LIARS. "

The book was called Revelation because God had foretold the future to Apostle John in the island of Patmos, Greece . In that said verse, God was talking about a future false church.

Jose Rizal certainly heard it loud and clear.

Beware of False Prophets

In terms of occupancy, hell is much bigger than heaven coz many will go to that place of torment compared to those who will make it to heaven. One major factor why it is so is because of false religions or false prophets who propagate it.

In Matthew 7:13-15 Jesus said "...wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction (Hell), and many there be which go in thereat; ... strait (or limited in space) is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life (Heaven), and few there be that find it. Beware of false prophets which come to you in sheep's clothing...".

The fact that God had said that many will go to hell and few to heaven just shows that these false prophets are much more effective in teaching their false doctrines than those who preach the true word of God. As a result, they have a much larger following.

It is very disappointing that many religions today use the name of Jesus Christ and that its priests or preachers act like they are His servants but in truth are really servants of the devil. It is equally disappointing that many members of these churches are easily duped into believing what they falsely teach.

Since the year 2001, four so called "Christian" nations have already legalized gay marriage. It's quite amazing that four nations (The Netherlands, Belgium, Spain and Canada) legalized it in just a span of 4 years. Next year, there could be another two or more and before we know it, other "Christian" nations would be following their lead just like popcorn. The only thing to blame in here is their practiced religion.

It should be noted that both Belgium and Spain are Catholic countries. Canada is 43% Catholic and 29% Protestant and most of its Protestant churches have linkups with the Catholic Church and other false religions thru its Ecumenical Movement. Their biggest protestant group, The United Church of Canada (UCC), previously stated that their church welcome "sexually active single adults, lesbian, gay and bisexual people into all aspects of the life and ministry of the Church". It means that they see nothing wrong with people engaged in fornication, adultery and same sex unions. If we read the Bible, these are the same people God will burn in Hell. Clearly, there are two conflicting messages here -- one from God and the other from the devil. Since their church unashamedly teach the devil's doctrine, it's more fitting that they should call their church as the United Devil's Church of Canada. That way, it would clear up things and there will be no mixups. The Netherlands, on the other hand, has become a secular state which means most of its populace has no religious affiliation. In Massachusetts, which currently is the only state in the U.S that have legalized gay marriage, 54% of its populace is Catholic and still rising..

This is just the cross-section of the kind of religions those people who supported gay marriage have. Most of them were Catholics, liberal Protestants that have linkups with other false religions and Secularists who are either aetheists or skeptics. All these religions or beliefs have one thing in common. They worship the same "God" but not the God in the Bible for in Romans 1:32 it states, "Who, knowing the judgment of God, that they who commit such things are worthy of death...".

When God speaks of death, He means everlasting hellfire. The people who approved of it never knew that they have stretched even wider what is already a very broad pathway to Hell. Most probably, they too are breezing thru that road themselves and on their way to destruction. No more stoplights for the lights or religions they attend to like the UCC have been signalling them to push on and run on full speed.

False religions are not that really hard to detect. Jesus said that "ye will know them by their fruits". So the next time another country, state or city legalizes gay marriage, examine what kind of religion those people who approved of it profess. And as sure as the sun rises from the east, those people would be either Catholic, liberal Protestants or Secularists.

When God says beware, one should not take it lightly. In Luke 12:5 Jesus said, "But I will forewarn you whom ye shall fear: Fear Him, which after he hath killed hath power to cast into hell; yea, I say unto you, Fear Him."

But what makes it more fearsome is the fact that it cannot be appealed like what other false religions want to suggest by teaching reincarnation or purgatory. The judgment of God is final and wherever He puts us in, Heaven or Hell, that would be permanent. The same is the fire and the worms crawling in one's body. They too would be permanent. The worms won't die and the fire won't quench either. It really is a place of torment and it's really very sad if some foolish religion would send somebody there.

"Beware of false prophets", said the Lord. I hope everybody would really ponder on this one.

And Jesus went about all Galilee, teaching in their synagogues, and preaching the gospel of the kingdom, and healing all manner of sickness and all manner of disease among the people.
And his fame went throughout all Syria: and they brought unto him all sick people that were taken with divers diseases and torments, and those which were possessed with devils, and those which were lunatick, and those that had the palsy; and he healed them.
And there followed him great multitudes of people from Galilee, and from Decapolis, and from Jerusalem, and from Judaea, and from beyond Jordan.

“those which were possessed with devils”

And he healed many that were sick of divers diseases, and cast out many devils; and suffered not the devils to speak, because they knew him.

“suffered not the devils to speak, because they knew him”

And in the synagogue there was a man, which had a spirit of an unclean devil, and cried out with a loud voice,
Saying, Let us alone; what have we to do with thee, thou Jesus of Nazareth? art thou come to destroy us? I know thee who thou art; the Holy One of God.

“a spirit of an unclean devil; what have we to do with thee, I know thee who thou art; the Holy One of God”

The enemy that sowed them is the devil; the harvest is the end of the world; and the reapers are the angels.

“The enemy that sowed them is the devil”
“suffered not the devils to speak, because they knew him”
“a spirit of an unclean devil; what have we to do with thee, I know thee who thou art; the Holy One of God”

But God be thanked, that ye were the servants of sin, but ye have obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine which was delivered you.

“ye have obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine which was delivered you”

Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils;
Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron;
Forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth.
For every creature of God is good, and nothing to be refused, if it be received with thanksgiving:
For it is sanctified by the word of God and prayer.

“the Spirit speaketh expressly”
“giving heed to seducing spirits”
‘doctrines of devils”
“For every creature of God is good”
“For it is sanctified by the word of God”

“those which were possessed with devils”
“suffered not the devils to speak, because they knew him”
“a spirit of an unclean devil; what have we to do with thee, I know thee who thou art; the Holy One of God”
“The enemy that sowed them is the devil”
“the Spirit speaketh expressly”
“giving heed to seducing spirits”
‘doctrines of devils”
“For every creature of God is good”
“For it is sanctified by the word of God”

In this the children of God are manifest, and the children of the devil: whosoever doeth not righteousness is not of God, neither he that loveth not his brother.

“In this the children of God are manifest, and the children of the devil”
"by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God."
"Necho king of Egypt came up, hearkened not unto the words of Necho from the mouth of God"
“a spirit of an unclean devil; what have we to do with thee, I know thee who thou art; the Holy One of God”
“For every creature of God is good”
“For it is sanctified by the word of God”

ccnl said "How about some specifics concerning the generalities"

What I post is specific, if I add to it, those words may be considered generalities.

Is it not yet a very little while, and Lebanon shall be turned into a fruitful field, and the fruitful field shall be esteemed as a forest?
And in that day shall the deaf hear the words of the book, and the eyes of the blind shall see out of obscurity, and out of darkness.
The meek also shall increase their joy in the Lord, and the poor among men shall rejoice in the Holy One of Israel.

They also that erred in spirit shall come to understanding, and they that murmured shall learn doctrine.

Was it Jim Carrey who starred in dumb and dumber?

If they are looking for the dumbest, nothing would beat this person.

Ok harold, show them what you got. Impress the hollywood kingpins.

Ponderer, what is it that you don't understand with the things I posted?

see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil

Here is wisdom, if you do not see it, if you do not hear it, then you will not speak it.

what kind of heart you have will determine your faith

Jews teach Moses, Aaron, David, Solomon
They have a heart from whom it was given.

harold, I understand the Bible but I don't understand what you are trying to prove with the kind of postings you make.

The only reason you're doing that is to flood this page.

Ponderer, what is it that you don't understand with the things I posted? I assume even a 1st grader would understand my posts. Please ask them if you need some help concerning reading comprehension.

spiderman2 said "Harold is a catholic and see how he defends his faith."

Saul is not a catholic
David is not a catholic
Solomon is not a catholic
Judas was not a catholic.

"see how he defends his faith" with the Word of the LORD, spiderman2 has not a heart to perceive, eyes to see, or ears to hear.

"But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God."

see how spiderman2 he defends his faith

"by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God."

"Necho king of Egypt came up, hearkened not unto the words of Necho from the mouth of God"

THE SEAT OF SATAN WOULD BURN SOON. THAT IS THE PROPHECY.

After all this, when Josiah had prepared the temple, Necho king of Egypt came up to fight against Carchemish by Euphrates: and Josiah went out against him.
But he sent ambassadors to him, saying, What have I to do with thee, thou king of Judah? I come not against thee this day, but against the house wherewith I have war: for God commanded me to make haste: forbear thee from meddling with God, who is with me, that he destroy thee not.
Nevertheless Josiah would not turn his face from him, but disguised himself, that he might fight with him, and hearkened not unto the words of Necho from the mouth of God, and came to fight in the valley of Megiddo.

I guess I'm the only one who finds Spiderman2s reference to "rational discussion" amusing??

Jonathan, Harold is a catholic and see how he defends his faith. Just exactly as Rafam did some days ago in which I was convinced that Islam is the most evil. Now it's a toss-up again. There are Catholics who behave like Islamic terrorists too. They just flood the page just to escape rational discussion.

It's been like this for centuries, the Vatican killing those people who challenge their doctrines to silence opposition.

HAROLD IS A VERY CLEAR EXAMPLE OF HOW THIS CHURCH OPERATES. THIS CHURCH HAS CREATED SO MUCH EVIL AROUND THE WORLD. THERE ARE MILLIONS OF HAROLDS OUT THERE THAT YOU DON'T SEE COZ THEY OPERATE IN THE JUNGLES FIGHTING THEIR GOVERNMENTS AND COLLECTING REVOLUTIONARY TAXES FROM THE POOR PEOPLE AND SCARING THE POPULACE NOT TO WORK IN THEIR FARM AND SO THE POVERTY CONTINUES, NON STOP

GOD HAS HAD ENOUGH OF THIS CHURCH, ITS HEADQUARTERS, THE SEAT OF SATAN WOULD BURN SOON. THAT IS THE PROPHECY.

Spiderman2 wrote:

"This is why Catholicism is dangerous. It cannot defend itself thru RATIONAL THINKING that is why it resorts to TERRORISM."

And:

"The fact that I can accurately foretell the future by reading the bible is enough proof that it is a trustworthy book."

First, don't let the pot accuse the kettle. Your pompous claims are no less unproven than those of Ratzinger. Second, don't count your chickens before they are hatched. Your statements about "prophecy" remain unproven and unprovable, as the future is always a malleable work in progress until after the fact.

Someone else has been quoting Josephus as a reliable historian for Jesus. I have to clarify: JOSEPHUS NEVER WROTE ABOUT JESUS! The so-called Josephus Testimony was forged by an editor named Eusebius who lived 300 years after Josephus. This is apparent because all the statements in are strictly against Josephus' personal and political views about messianism. Earl Doherty's Jesus Puzzle e-book proves this empirically.

I personally believe that the historic Jesus was really the organized crime kingpin Joshua Barabbas, as Michael Magee shows at www.askwhy.co.uk in the New Testament section. It's a great read.

Grouse: if you're still reading, I found this from the Catholic Answers web site:

"A pope’s private theological opinions are not infallible, only what he solemnly defines is considered to be infallible teaching."

So there you have it, it's infallible if it's defined "solemnly." Seems like Susan was right on that account.

Additionally, this is what bannered the web site, so we all might get a flavor of the Catholic Answers web site in general:

"...If you want to help us defend our Catholic youth against the deceptive work of “Catholics for a Free Choice” … “Condoms 4 Life” … “Homosexuals and Church” … “Community Action Against Homophobia” … and a host of other extremist groups . . .

. . . then please read on . . . Here’s What We Plan to Do to Stop Them! "

Wow it makes me want to jump right into the Catholic boat!

TO HUMANITY:

I am thankful that God has a Plan.

I am thankful that God is not even close to being anything like what some of the people that know His Name think that He is.

Take care, be ready, see you in the Kingdom [the new heavens and the new earth].

Sincerely, Thomas Paul Moses Baum.

Spiderman2,

Your continued commenartary simply adds more credence to what has been noted before:

Fools are those who have read only the bible. God cannot be proud of such lazy creations!!!!

What "voodooer of the hoodoo" blessed you with such stupidity in the field of fortune telling and interpretations of said stupidity???

The fact that I can accurately foretell the future by reading the bible is enough proof that it is a trustworthy book and the fact that unbelievers don't understand and don't know how to interpret it's metaphors is a sign that it is a VERY INTELLIGENT DOCUMENT.

The authors themselves like Apostle John and Daniel don't know what they wrote but the people for whom it is written (the future believers) understand it very loud and clear. THAT IN ITSELF IS A SMALL MIRACLE IF NOT A MIRACLE TO THE HIGHEST DEGREE.

See also Wikipedia's review of the historical Jesus to include the Tacitus' reference to the crucifixion of Jesus.

From ask.com,

"One of the greatest historians of ancient Rome, Cornelius Tacitus is a primary source for much of what is known about life the first and second centuries after the life of Jesus. His most famous works, Histories and Annals, exist in fragmentary form, though many of his earlier writings were lost to time. Tacitus is known for being generally reliable (if somewhat biased toward what he saw as Roman immorality) and for having a uniquely direct (if not blunt) writing style."

Besides the Josephus references, NT exegetes like Professors Crossan, Borg, Fredriksen, Wright and Armstrong) use the following attestations to Jesus' crucifixion as proof he existed.

Crucifixion of Jesus:(1) 1 Cor 15:3b; (2a) Gos. Pet. 4:10-5:16,18-20; 6:22; (2b) Mark 15:22-38 = Matt 27:33-51a = Luke 23:32-46; (2c) John 19:17b-25a,28-36; (3) Barn. 7:3-5; (4a) 1 Clem. 16:3-4 (=Isaiah 53:1-12); (4b) 1 Clem. 16.15-16 (=Psalm 22:6-8); (5a) Ign. Mag. 11; (5b) Ign. Trall. 9:1b; (5c) Ign. Smyrn. 1.2.-

I (Professor Crossan) do not presume that there were any high-level confrontations between Caiaphas and Pilate and Herod Antipas either about Jesus or with Jesus. No doubt they would have agreed before the festival that fast action was to be taken against any disturbance and that a few examples by crucifixion might be especially useful at the outset. And I doubt very much if Jewish police or Roman soldiers needed to go too far up the chain of command in handling a Galilean peasant like Jesus. It is hard for us to imagine the casual brutality with which Jesus was probably taken and executed. All those "last week" details in our gospels, as distinct from the brute facts just mentioned, are prophecy turned into history, rather than history remembered.

From Professor Crossan's book, Who was Jesus?,

The Jewish historian, Josephus and the pagan historian Tacitus both agree that Jesus was executed by order of the Roman governor of Judea. And is very hard to imagine that Jesus' followers would have invented such a story unless it indeed happened.

I hope Susan omits the spamming post of harold .

This is why Catholicism is dangerous. It cannot defend itself thru RATIONAL THINKING that is why it resorts to TERRORISM.

The only time they stop FORCED CONVERSION in their history is when they CANNOT enforced it anymore because of heavy defeats in the wars they started.

Copy and paste that again and again repeatedly as what you do with other scriptures.

it is BETTER TO MARRY THAN TO BURN." (1 Corinthians 7:9)
it is BETTER TO MARRY THAN TO BURN." (1 Corinthians 7:9)
it is BETTER TO MARRY THAN TO BURN." (1 Corinthians 7:9)

No pope will ever go to heaven coz they don't believe the Bible.

For the rest of the catholics who think the same way as their pope, TAKE HEED OR YOU TOO WILL BURN.

Hmmm, getting some "blog holding" messages about innocuous commentary. Very strange!!

Let us submit a little at a time and see what is upsetting the "blog dogs" at WaPo.

That Jesus was crucified under Pontius Pilate, as the Creed states, is as certain as anything historical can ever be.

Harold,

Hmmm, Bred, Born and Brainwashed in the OT I see!!! How about some specifics concerning the generalities of your text to include the passages of the OT you are citing??

the hidden manna

That in blessing I will bless thee, and in multiplying I will multiply thy seed as the stars of the heaven, and as the sand which is upon the sea shore; and thy seed shall possess the gate of his enemies;

And of Levi he said, Let thy Thummim and thy Urim be with thy holy one, whom thou didst prove at Massah, and with whom thou didst strive at the waters of Meribah;
Who said unto his father and to his mother, I have not seen him; neither did he acknowledge his brethren, nor knew his own children: for they have observed thy word, and kept thy covenant.
They shall teach Jacob thy judgments, and Israel thy law: they shall put incense before thee, and whole burnt sacrifice upon thine altar.
Bless, Lord, his substance, and accept the work of his hands; smite through the loins of them that rise against him, and of them that hate him, that they rise not again.

David
I will multiply thy seed as the stars of the heaven

And God gave Solomon wisdom and understanding exceeding much, and largeness of heart, even as the sand that is on the sea shore.
And Solomon's wisdom excelled the wisdom of all the children of the east country, and all the wisdom of Egypt.
For he was wiser than all men; than Ethan the Ezrahite, and Heman, and Chalcol, and Darda, the sons of Mahol: and his fame was in all nations round about.

That in blessing I will bless thee as the sand which is upon the sea shore

Solomon wisdom and understanding exceeding much, and largeness of heart, even as the sand that is on the sea shore.

And ye shall serve the Lord your God, and He shall bless thy bread, and thy water

“He shall bless thy bread”

“With him will I speak mouth to mouth”
“Thou shalt feed my people Israel”
“The lips of the righteous feed many”
“I have preached righteousness, I have not refrained my lips”

“He shall bless thy water”
The Lord is the portion of mine inheritance and of my cup: thou maintainest my lot.

I will take the cup of salvation, and call upon the name of the Lord.

“He shall bless thy water”

“drinketh water of the rain of heaven”
“My doctrine shall drop as the rain”
“where were twelve wells of water, and threescore and ten palm trees: and they encamped there by the waters.”
“The Lord is the portion of mine inheritance and of my cup”
“I will take the cup of salvation”

Soul- bread= my mouth speaketh wisdom my lips righteousness
Breath- water= My doctrine my cup

These sought their register among those that were reckoned by genealogy, but they were not found: therefore were they, as polluted, put from the priesthood.
And the Tirshatha said unto them, that they should not eat of the most holy things, till there stood up a priest with Urim and with Thummim.
The whole congregation together was forty and two thousand three hundred and threescore,

“they should not eat of the most holy things, till there stood up a priest with Urim and with Thummim.”

“Thummim and thy Urim be with thy holy one”

“be with thy holy one”

Then verily the first covenant had also ordinances of divine service, and a worldly sanctuary.
For there was a tabernacle made; the first, wherein was the candlestick, and the table, and the shewbread; which is called the sanctuary.
And after the second veil, the tabernacle which is called the Holiest of all;
Which had the golden censer, and the ark of the covenant overlaid round about with gold, wherein was the golden pot that had manna, and Aaron's rod that budded, and the tables of the covenant;
And over it the cherubims of glory shadowing the mercyseat; of which we cannot now speak particularly.

“the golden pot that had manna”

He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches; To him that overcometh will I give to eat of the hidden manna, and will give him a white stone, and in the stone a new name written, which no man knoweth saving he that receiveth it.

“the hidden manna”

And ye shall serve the Lord your God, and He shall bless thy bread, and thy water

“He shall bless thy bread”

“With him will I speak mouth to mouth”
“Thou shalt feed my people Israel”
“The lips of the righteous feed many”
“I have preached righteousness, I have not refrained my lips”

I will take the cup of salvation, and call upon the name of the Lord.

“He shall bless thy water”

“drinketh water of the rain of heaven”
“My doctrine shall drop as the rain”
“where were twelve wells of water, and threescore and ten palm trees: and they encamped there by the waters.”
“The Lord is the portion of mine inheritance and of my cup”
“I will take the cup of salvation”

Soul- bread= my mouth speaketh wisdom my lips righteousness
Breath- water= My doctrine my cup

the table of the covenant;

Soul- bread= my mouth speaketh wisdom my lips righteousness
Breath- water= My doctrine my cup

For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them.

That in blessing I will bless thee, and in multiplying I will multiply thy seed as the stars of the heaven, and as the sand which is upon the sea shore; and thy seed shall possess the gate of his enemies;

“thy seed shall possess the gate of his enemies”

And they blessed Rebekah, and said unto her, Thou art our sister, be thou the mother of thousands of millions, and let thy seed possess the gate of those which hate them.

“let thy seed possess the gate of those which hate them.”

And the Lord said unto her, Two nations are in thy womb, and two manner of people shall be separated from thy bowels; and the one people shall be stronger than the other people; and the elder shall serve the younger.

“two manner of people shall be separated from thy bowels”

As he spake to our fathers, to Abraham, and to his seed for ever.
And Mary abode with her about three months, and returned to her own house.

“Abraham, and to his seed for ever.” “Mary abode with her about three months”

Then answered all the people, and said, His blood be on us, and on our children.
Then released he Barabbas unto them: and when he had scourged Jesus, he delivered him to be crucified.
Then the soldiers of the governor took Jesus into the common hall, and gathered unto him the whole band of soldiers.
And they stripped him, and put on him a scarlet robe.
And when they had platted a crown of thorns, they put it upon his head, and a reed in his right hand: and they bowed the knee before him, and mocked him, saying, Hail, King of the Jews!
And they spit upon him, and took the reed, and smote him on the head.
And after that they had mocked him, they took the robe off from him, and put his own raiment on him, and led him away to crucify him.
And as they came out, they found a man of Cyrene, Simon by name: him they compelled to bear his cross.
And when they were come unto a place called Golgotha, that is to say, a place of a skull,
They gave him vinegar to drink mingled with gall: and when he had tasted thereof, he would not drink.
And they crucified him, and parted his garments, casting lots: that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet, They parted my garments among them, and upon my vesture did they cast lots.

“Golgotha, that is to say, a place of a skull”

And as Jehu entered in at the gate, she said, Had Zimri peace, who slew his master?
And he lifted up his face to the window, and said, Who is on my side? who? And there looked out to him two or three eunuchs.
And he said, Throw her down. So they threw her down: and some of her blood was sprinkled on the wall, and on the horses: and he trode her under foot.
And when he was come in, he did eat and drink, and said, Go, see now this cursed woman, and bury her: for she is a king's daughter.
And they went to bury her: but they found no more of her than the skull, and the feet, and the palms of her hands.
Wherefore they came again, and told him. And he said, This is the word of the Lord, which he spake by his servant Elijah the Tishbite, saying, In the portion of Jezreel shall dogs eat the flesh of Jezebel:
And the carcase of Jezebel shall be as dung upon the face of the field in the portion of Jezreel; so that they shall not say, This is Jezebel.

“And there looked out to him two or three eunuchs”
“Throw her down”
“now this cursed woman, and bury her: for she is a king's daughter.”
“for she is a king's daughter.”
“found no more of her than the skull”
“the feet”
“the palms of her hands”
“the portion of Jezreel shall dogs eat the flesh of Jezebel”

So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.

“faith cometh by the word of God”

Wherefore take unto you the whole armour of God, that ye may be able to withstand in the evil day, and having done all, to stand.
Stand therefore, having your loins girt about with truth, and having on the breastplate of righteousness;
And your feet shod with the preparation of the gospel of peace;
Above all, taking the shield of faith, wherewith ye shall be able to quench all the fiery darts of the wicked.
And take the helmet of salvation, and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God:

“taking the shield of faith”
“And take the helmet of salvation”
“sword of the Spirit”
“is the word of God”

But be not thou far from me, O Lord: O my strength, haste thee to help me.
Deliver my soul from the sword; my darling from the power of the dog.

“Deliver my soul from the sword”

“from the power of the dog”

“Deliver my soul from the sword”

“taking the shield of faith”
“And take the helmet of salvation”
“sword of the Spirit”
“is the word of God”

“for she is a king's daughter.”
“found no more of her than the skull”
“Golgotha, that is to say, a place of a skull”
“the feet”
“the palms of her hands”
“the portion of Jezreel shall dogs eat the flesh of Jezebel”

“thy seed shall possess the gate of his enemies”
“Abraham, and to his seed for ever.” “Mary abode with “her” about three months”

“blessed Rebekah”
“let thy seed possess the gate of those which hate them.”
“two manner of people shall be separated from thy bowels”

For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them.
“Golgotha, that is to say, a place of a skull”

“And there looked out to him two or three eunuchs”

“found no more of her than the skull”
“the feet”
“the palms of her hands”
“the portion of Jezreel shall dogs eat the flesh of Jezebel”

“Deliver my soul from the sword”

“from the power of the dog”
“the portion of Jezreel shall dogs eat the flesh of Jezebel”

The Jesus Seminar after reviewing all the scriptural and non-scriptural documents from the time period, voted red (the event occurred) as follows:

Jesus was crucified

Jesus was crucified under Pontius Pilate

Jesus was crucified with the participation of the highest Jewish authorities

Jesus was crucified in Jerusalem

Jesus was crucified at Golgotha

For those interested in historical Jesus studies, see Professor Crossan's books, Who is Jesus, The Historical Jesus and Excavating Jesus. Other contemporary NT exegetes and their books on the subject are reviewed at earlychristianwritings.com/theories.html

Testing, one, two, three

Spiderman2 and Concerned the Christian Now Liberated:

You both need to grow up, and write in a mature fashion. CTCNL has some good points about the historicity (and lack thereof) of the Bible, but doesn't get them across very well.

Spidey is right about the superstitious nonsense of the Catholic Church, but take the plank out of your own eye before removing your brother's speck, as your posts are full of similar nonsense and superstition, as CTCNL says, pretty magic wingy flying thingies.

The straight record: There is no evidence Abraham or Moses existed, and good evidence AGAINST Moses and Joshua. Egypt and the Sinai Peninsula have been searched for evidence of Israelites camped there for the requisite years, and there are no Israelite markers or litter for 400 years in Egypt or 40 years in the desert where their garbage would have accumulated. The Joshua years were a peaceful time, when Jericho was a small unfortified village, not the great walled city it only became AFTER the Israelites took over.

The kings from David onward are probably a good list, just as we have good POTUS lists today. Fairy tales and magic like Elijah's fire were sprinkled in wherever the myth-makers saw fit.

Nineveh never had a citywide revival like the one Jonah supposedly caused.

The Book of Daniel has the wrong identities for the kings it describes and completely invents a fictitious king, Darius the Mede. It was written to describe a time 400 years earlier than its writer, who had not perfectly researched the time. Similarly Esther is the story of a great war which could never have happened in the well-documented time described. These are alternate-historical fictions like Gone With the Wind or Forrest Gump.

There is no record of a messianic preacher who was named Jesus and had the right descriptions, nor any unusual earthquakes, eclipses or bread-multiplications at the right time, yet Josephus should have written much about the former (the famous Jesus Letter of Josephus is a confirmed forgery), and Pliny the Elder should have written about the latter. Everywhere that should have Jesus-evidence, doesn't, so there is reason to say he didn't exist, or only existed as a common man.

Revelation "predicts" a great war in the OLD Roman Empire which never happened, so its author John is a false prophet.

Biology of neurons has confirmed that the "soul" comes from the brain and does not outlast it, and is not from "God."

Lastly, if God wants people to "believe" in his existence, he ought to take a public stroll down Times Square!

Exposing stupidity is not synonymous to unkindness, anger and hate. In fact we always do this to our kids. We teach them not to be stupid even with a loud voice or a stick in our hand.

It's called care otherwise we let them go astray.

In this day of man's humanity to man, of unkindness, anger and hate, it would be well for any contributor to be asked kindly, before writing, to sit down and remove hate and anger from their thoughts and feelings. These emotions color negatively the approach anyone makes to a topic, and likely impinge on the accuracy of comments made.

It is helpful, though, for a contributor to do as Susan Jacoby did here, to state the position from which he or she operates. Knowing that she has left Catholicism does help us put her words into perspective. As one who is of another religious persuasion than Catholicism, I champion kindness and fairness toward any religious group in addition to my own.

Phillip C. Smith, Ph.D.

Spiderman2,

Your papal exorcism has been scheduled for next Friday in Rome. CNN will cover the event.

Harold wrote " But Jesus said unto him, Follow me; and let the dead bury their dead. let the dead bury their dead. a dead language be read to the masses. "

This is a clear sign of a fool interpreting the Bible. A dead language be read to the masses? That is because the masses you're refering to are the Catholic masses who are "dead" or UNSAVED. The "living" are those who have attained "life" or eternal life and the "dead" are those UNSAVED and are going to Hell.

If you refer to Catholics as the dead crowd, you are exactly right. Right on this one but wrong on the rest.

Can't you see what Catholicism had done to your thinking? Is that what your stupid priests told you?

I pity you guys. The blind leading the blind continues for centuries. They never learned although centuries have already passed since Christ spoke those words.

Let the dead bury the dead means let the unsaved bury the unsaved.

When will you folks learn? That is a clear example of a "natural man" without the guidance of the Holy Spirit interpreting the Word of God.

That is the result of years of Catechism or man-made doctrines. You have become an institution of fools.

Harold, Harold, Harold

The Bible is like a surgeon's sharp scalpel. It can be very useful in the hands of the surgeon but if a fool holds it, it becomes a dangerous tool.

Had you not wondered how those bread and "holy water" made those number of priests become p e d o p h i l e s and fornicators?

They spend more time eating those bread and "blessing" those "holy" water than reading the Bible and let it guide them.

The Bible is the holy water and the holy bread. Eat it so you will be filled.

COPY AND PASTE THIS SO YOUR POPE AND PRIESTS WILL LEARN

"But if they cannot contain, let them marry: for it is BETTER TO MARRY THAN TO BURN." (1 Corinthians 7:9)

And that I can say is INFALLIBLE.

Copy and paste that again and again repeatedly as what you do with other scriptures.

it is BETTER TO MARRY THAN TO BURN." (1 Corinthians 7:9)
it is BETTER TO MARRY THAN TO BURN." (1 Corinthians 7:9)
it is BETTER TO MARRY THAN TO BURN." (1 Corinthians 7:9)

No pope will ever go to heaven coz they don't believe the Bible.

For the rest of the catholics who think the same way as their pope, TAKE HEED OR YOU TOO WILL BURN.

Spiderman2,

I called the Pope about your condition. He is willing to do your exorcism, here or in Rome. Your choice!!!

But Jesus said unto him, Follow me; and let the dead bury their dead.

let the dead bury their dead.
a dead language be read to the masses
"counted as sheep for the slaughter"
"Like sheep they are laid in the grave; death shall feed on them"

Yea, for thy sake are we killed all the day long; we are counted as sheep for the slaughter.

Like sheep they are laid in the grave; death shall feed on them; and the upright shall have dominion over them in the morning; and their beauty shall consume in the grave from their dwelling.

The Church Jesus Christ Built

In Matthew 16:18 Jesus said, "And I say unto thee (referring to Peter), that thou art Peter (petro or stone or rock), and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

In Acts 15:7 Peter said, " ...Men and brethren, ye know how that a good whil e ago God made choice (or selected) among us, that the Gentiles (or we the people who are not Jews) by my mouth (or thru his preaching) should hear the word of the gospel, and believe."

In verse 9 & 11, he continues, " And put no difference between us (Jews) and them (Gentiles), purifying their hearts by faith ... But we believe that thru the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved, even as they."

If we read the whole of Acts 15, those words of Peter were made to clear up matters in which some of the members of the church (newly converted Pharisees) want to include the law of Moses in order to be saved.

Prior to this event or dispute, Apostle Paul and Barnabas had been preaching to the Gentiles the salvation of souls thru faith in Jesus Christ . In Acts 14:27 it says, "... and how He (God) had opened the door of faith unto the Gentiles." Also in Acts 13:39 it says " And by Him (Jesus Christ) all that believe are justified from all things, from which ye could not be justified by the law of Moses."

In the midst of the debate, Apostle Peter, whom Jesus Christ had first chosen to preach the gospel to the Gentiles, stood up and confirmed the teaching of Apostle Paul that indeed salvation is by grace thru faith in Jesus Christ which is made possible thru the enlightening of the Holy Spirit. In the eyes of God, nobody can satisfactorily follow the "unveiled" law of Moses unless dwelt upon by the Holy Spirit of Jesus Christ. One of the "veiled" law of Moses is circumcision of the foreskin but its true or unveiled meaning is that of the "circumcision of the heart" or being "born-again" in other words (Romans 2:29).

It was taught upon the Catholic people that their church was started by Peter. Many believe it and for this reason many choose to stand by this church and defend "what Peter had started".

But in reality, the Catholic Church has been a fierce enemy to the doctrine propagated by Peter, Paul, the other Apostles and of Jesus Christ. When Martin Luther (a former priest) floated the idea of "justification by faith", which the apostles especially Peter and Paul had long ago preached to the Gentiles, all hell broke loose and it caused many terrible wars and massacres done by the church just to suppress that doctrine. If Peter and Paul were present during those time when Catholicism was at its peak of power and had they changed their names to avoid recognition, they too could have been burned at the stake also for preaching "justification by faith".

Despite the tremendous power of the Roman Catholic Church during that time, it didn't succeed to extinguish that holy doctrine coz as what Jesus Christ had said, " the gates of hell shall not prevail against it ". As what Martin Luther had said, "the body they may kill : but God's truth abideth still". And true enough it still abides today and even gave birth to a great nation (In God We Trust) and it will continue to abide even to the end of time. [ But this nation will suffer or be punished because of the foolishness (rising atheism, sexual promiscuity, gay marriage, garbage music, TV programs & movies centered on sex) which some or many of its people, who are ignorant of that holy doctrine, are promoting. With Catholicism, liberal Protestantism, atheism and other false religions slowly "invading" it, God won't spare parts of that nation to feel the brunt of His anger.]

For a very long time upto now, the salvation doctrine of Catholicism has been the sacraments like infant baptism, confession to the priests and penance, holy communion, confirmation, etc. Some even consider the role of Mary in their salvation plan. It just couldn't stop of thinking what really could save a person coz in reality, they really don't know and that explains why they have so many ways.

Justification by faith was never a part of their salvation doctrine and anybody who espoused that idea during those dark centuries were properly dealt with.

It must be noted that no Apostle ever performed infant baptism; no Apostle had a confession booth and gave penance; no Apostle performed the holy communion for the salvation of souls and neither was "confirmation" used by them. Also, no Apostle prayed to Mary for intercession to God. Whatever Catholicism has been teaching their flock like lighting candles, praying the rosary, praying to the saints, reciting prayer books, getting their properties blessed with "holy water", no Apostle ever did those things coz they are just purely Catholicism's own inventions. And as always, man's inventions especially if it pertains to godliness always fall short with God's standards. No person can ever make his own way to Heaven. It's either God's way or no way.

Catholicism was not the church Jesus Christ built in which Peter and the rest of the Apostles was tasked to propagate. On the contrary it is the church which persecuted and tried to destroy God's true church.

Jesus Christ had said, "upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it." This said church is already present with us and its not Catholicism, nor liberal Protestantism, nor Judaism, nor Islam, nor Hinduism, nor Taoism, nor Buddhism nor any other big or small religion that may name Christ but has other ways of salvation other than the simple faith in Jesus Christ which He personally gives to whoever He sees fit to receive it.

Blind faith?
Yet the Lord hath not given you an heart to perceive, and eyes to see, and ears to hear, unto this day.

this is blind faith
"Lord hath not given you an heart to perceive"

Harold wrote "Quoting Dave I came to this realization was a gift of faith"

Remember that there is blind faith. Those Pharisees have "faith" but Jesus called them children of the Devil.

For more than a thousand years, the Vatican withhold the Bible to the masses and let the Vulgate which is a latin translation and is a dead language be read in their masses. Even selectively at that.

Why?

ONLY A FOOL WOULD NOT KNOW THE REASON WHY.

And they began to accuse him, saying, We found this fellow perverting the nation, and forbidding to give tribute to Caesar, saying that he himself is Christ a King.

And from thenceforth Pilate sought to release him: but the Jews cried out, saying, If thou let this man go, thou art not Caesar's friend: whosoever maketh himself a king speaketh against Caesar.

But they cried out, Away with him, away with him, crucify him. Pilate saith unto them, Shall I crucify your King? The chief priests answered, We have no king but Caesar.

” forbidding to give tribute to Caesar, saying that he himself is Christ a King”
“whosoever maketh himself a king speaketh against Caesar.”
“We have no king but Caesar.”
“Shall I crucify your King?”

Caesar is Christ a King

Simon the Canaanite built the house of god in rome. "Cursed be Canaan; a servant of servants shall he be unto his brethren" his brethren were romans. the house was built for caesar.
And Noah awoke from his wine, and knew what his younger son had done unto him.
And he said, Cursed be Canaan; a servant of servants shall he be unto his brethren.

"Cursed be Canaan; a servant of servants shall he be unto his brethren"
“We have no king but Caesar.”
“Shall I crucify your King?”
Caesar is Christ a King

spiderman2 do you know who simon peter was

And Simon he surnamed Peter;
And James the son of Zebedee, and John the brother of James; and he surnamed them Boanerges, which is, The sons of thunder:
And Andrew, and Philip, and Bartholomew, and Matthew, and Thomas, and James the son of Alphaeus, and Thaddaeus, and Simon the Canaanite,

Simon the Canaanite built the house of god in rome. "Cursed be Canaan; a servant of servants shall he be unto his brethren" his brethren were romans. the house was built for caesar.

And Noah awoke from his wine, and knew what his younger son had done unto him.
And he said, Cursed be Canaan; a servant of servants shall he be unto his brethren.

Harold, Harold, Harold

The Bible is like a surgeon's sharp scalpel. It can be very useful in the hands of the surgeon but if a fool holds it, it becomes a dangerous tool.

Had you not wondered how those bread and "holy water" made those number of priests become p e d o p h i l e s and fornicators?

They spend more time eating those bread and "blessing" those "holy" water than reading the Bible and let it guide them.

The Bible is the holy water and the holy bread. Eat it so you will be filled.

COPY AND PASTE THIS SO YOUR POPE AND PRIESTS WILL LEARN

"But if they cannot contain, let them marry: for it is BETTER TO MARRY THAN TO BURN." (1 Corinthians 7:9)

And that I can say is INFALLIBLE.

Copy and paste that again and again repeatedly as what you do with other scriptures.

it is BETTER TO MARRY THAN TO BURN." (1 Corinthians 7:9)
it is BETTER TO MARRY THAN TO BURN." (1 Corinthians 7:9)
it is BETTER TO MARRY THAN TO BURN." (1 Corinthians 7:9)

No pope will ever go to heaven coz they don't believe the Bible.

For the rest of the catholics who think the same way as their pope, TAKE HEED OR YOU TOO WILL BURN.

The Church Jesus Christ Built

In Matthew 16:18 Jesus said, "And I say unto thee (referring to Peter), that thou art Peter (petro or stone or rock), and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

In Acts 15:7 Peter said, " ...Men and brethren, ye know how that a good whil e ago God made choice (or selected) among us, that the Gentiles (or we the people who are not Jews) by my mouth (or thru his preaching) should hear the word of the gospel, and believe."

In verse 9 & 11, he continues, " And put no difference between us (Jews) and them (Gentiles), purifying their hearts by faith ... But we believe that thru the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved, even as they."

If we read the whole of Acts 15, those words of Peter were made to clear up matters in which some of the members of the church (newly converted Pharisees) want to include the law of Moses in order to be saved.

Prior to this event or dispute, Apostle Paul and Barnabas had been preaching to the Gentiles the salvation of souls thru faith in Jesus Christ . In Acts 14:27 it says, "... and how He (God) had opened the door of faith unto the Gentiles." Also in Acts 13:39 it says " And by Him (Jesus Christ) all that believe are justified from all things, from which ye could not be justified by the law of Moses."

In the midst of the debate, Apostle Peter, whom Jesus Christ had first chosen to preach the gospel to the Gentiles, stood up and confirmed the teaching of Apostle Paul that indeed salvation is by grace thru faith in Jesus Christ which is made possible thru the enlightening of the Holy Spirit. In the eyes of God, nobody can satisfactorily follow the "unveiled" law of Moses unless dwelt upon by the Holy Spirit of Jesus Christ. One of the "veiled" law of Moses is circumcision of the foreskin but its true or unveiled meaning is that of the "circumcision of the heart" or being "born-again" in other words (Romans 2:29).

It was taught upon the Catholic people that their church was started by Peter. Many believe it and for this reason many choose to stand by this church and defend "what Peter had started".

But in reality, the Catholic Church has been a fierce enemy to the doctrine propagated by Peter, Paul, the other Apostles and of Jesus Christ. When Martin Luther (a former priest) floated the idea of "justification by faith", which the apostles especially Peter and Paul had long ago preached to the Gentiles, all hell broke loose and it caused many terrible wars and massacres done by the church just to suppress that doctrine. If Peter and Paul were present during those time when Catholicism was at its peak of power and had they changed their names to avoid recognition, they too could have been burned at the stake also for preaching "justification by faith".

Despite the tremendous power of the Roman Catholic Church during that time, it didn't succeed to extinguish that holy doctrine coz as what Jesus Christ had said, " the gates of hell shall not prevail against it ". As what Martin Luther had said, "the body they may kill : but God's truth abideth still". And true enough it still abides today and even gave birth to a great nation (In God We Trust) and it will continue to abide even to the end of time. [ But this nation will suffer or be punished because of the foolishness (rising atheism, sexual promiscuity, gay marriage, garbage music, TV programs & movies centered on sex) which some or many of its people, who are ignorant of that holy doctrine, are promoting. With Catholicism, liberal Protestantism, atheism and other false religions slowly "invading" it, God won't spare parts of that nation to feel the brunt of His anger.]

For a very long time upto now, the salvation doctrine of Catholicism has been the sacraments like infant baptism, confession to the priests and penance, holy communion, confirmation, etc. Some even consider the role of Mary in their salvation plan. It just couldn't stop of thinking what really could save a person coz in reality, they really don't know and that explains why they have so many ways.

Justification by faith was never a part of their salvation doctrine and anybody who espoused that idea during those dark centuries were properly dealt with.

It must be noted that no Apostle ever performed infant baptism; no Apostle had a confession booth and gave penance; no Apostle performed the holy communion for the salvation of souls and neither was "confirmation" used by them. Also, no Apostle prayed to Mary for intercession to God. Whatever Catholicism has been teaching their flock like lighting candles, praying the rosary, praying to the saints, reciting prayer books, getting their properties blessed with "holy water", no Apostle ever did those things coz they are just purely Catholicism's own inventions. And as always, man's inventions especially if it pertains to godliness always fall short with God's standards. No person can ever make his own way to Heaven. It's either God's way or no way.

Catholicism was not the church Jesus Christ built in which Peter and the rest of the Apostles was tasked to propagate. On the contrary it is the church which persecuted and tried to destroy God's true church.

Jesus Christ had said, "upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it." This said church is already present with us and its not Catholicism, nor liberal Protestantism, nor Judaism, nor Islam, nor Hinduism, nor Taoism, nor Buddhism nor any other big or small religion that may name Christ but has other ways of salvation other than the simple faith in Jesus Christ which He personally gives to whoever He sees fit to receive it.

Quoting Dave I came to this realization was a gift of faith

Who knoweth not in all these that the hand of the Lord hath wrought this?
In whose hand is the soul of every living thing, and the breath of all mankind.
Doth not the ear try words? and the mouth taste his meat?
With the ancient is wisdom; and in length of days understanding.
With him is wisdom and strength, he hath counsel and understanding.

“With him is wisdom and strength”

The Lord by wisdom hath founded the earth; by understanding hath he established the heavens.

These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the Lord made the earth and the heavens,

When thou tillest the ground, it shall not henceforth yield unto thee her strength; a fugitive and a vagabond shalt thou be in the earth.

Then Isaac sowed in that land, and received in the same year an hundredfold: and the Lord blessed him.

He will keep the feet of his saints, and the wicked shall be silent in darkness; for by strength shall no man prevail.

And also the Strength of Israel will not lie nor repent: for he is not a man, that he should repent.

“With him is wisdom and strength”

The Lord by wisdom hath founded the earth
the Lord made the earth and the heavens
thou tillest the ground, it shall not henceforth yield unto thee her strength
Then Isaac sowed in that land
by strength shall no man prevail.
Strength of Israel is not a man

he hath counsel and understanding

And Moses' father in law said unto him, The thing that thou doest is not good.
Thou wilt surely wear away, both thou, and this people that is with thee: for this thing is too heavy for thee; thou art not able to perform it thyself alone.
Hearken now unto my voice, I will give thee counsel, and God shall be with thee: be thou for the people to God-ward, that thou mayest bring the causes unto God:
And thou shalt teach them ordinances and laws, and shalt shew them the way wherein they must walk, and the work that they must do.

he hath counsel and understanding

Moses' “Father” in “law”
Hearken now unto my voice
I will give thee counsel
by understanding hath he established the heavens.

And ye shall serve the Lord your God, and He shall bless thy bread, and thy water; and I will take sickness away from the midst of thee.

He shall bless thy bread, and thy water

The righteous shall inherit the land, and dwell therein for ever.
The mouth of the righteous speaketh wisdom, and his tongue talketh of judgment.
The law of his God is in his heart; none of his steps shall slide.

Now therefore go, and I will be with thy mouth, and teach thee what thou shalt say.

My servant Moses is not so, who is faithful in all mine house.
With him will I speak mouth to mouth, even apparently, and not in dark speeches; and the similitude of the Lord shall he behold: wherefore then were ye not afraid to speak against my servant Moses?

“The mouth of the righteous speaketh wisdom”

With him will I speak mouth to mouth

Thou shalt feed my people Israel, and thou shalt be ruler over my people Israel.

The lips of the righteous feed many: but fools die for want of wisdom.

I have preached righteousness in the great congregation: lo, I have not refrained my lips, O Lord, thou knowest.

And ye shall serve the Lord your God, and He shall bless thy bread, and thy water

“He shall bless thy bread”

“With him will I speak mouth to mouth”
“Thou shalt feed my people Israel”
“The lips of the righteous feed many”
“I have preached righteousness, I have not refrained my lips”

“He shall bless thy water”
The Lord is the portion of mine inheritance and of my cup: thou maintainest my lot.

I will take the cup of salvation, and call upon the name of the Lord.

“He shall bless thy water”

“drinketh water of the rain of heaven”
“My doctrine shall drop as the rain”
“where were twelve wells of water, and threescore and ten palm trees: and they encamped there by the waters.”
“The Lord is the portion of mine inheritance and of my cup”
“I will take the cup of salvation”

Soul- bread= my mouth speaketh wisdom my lips righteousness
Breath- water= My doctrine my cup

I came to this realization was a gift of faith

For jealousy is the rage of a man: therefore he will not spare in the day of vengeance.
He will not regard any ransom; neither will he rest content, though thou givest many gifts.

He that is greedy of gain troubleth his own house; but he that hateth gifts shall live.

For these be the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled.

Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.

But Peter said unto him, Thy money perish with thee, because thou hast thought that the gift of God may be purchased with money.

And they of the circumcision which believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost.

For the gifts and calling of God are without repentance.

Now concerning spiritual gifts, brethren, I would not have you ignorant.
Ye know that ye were Gentiles, carried away unto these dumb idols, even as ye were led.

For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:

And he cometh the third time, and saith unto them, Sleep on now, and take your rest: it is enough, the hour is come; behold, the Son of man is betrayed into the hands of sinners.

And, behold, a woman in the city, which was a sinner, when she knew that Jesus sat at meat in the Pharisee's house, brought an alabaster box of ointment,
And stood at his feet behind him weeping, and began to wash his feet with tears, and did wipe them with the hairs of her head, and kissed his feet, and anointed them with the ointment.
Now when the Pharisee which had bidden him saw it, he spake within himself, saying, This man, if he were a prophet, would have known who and what manner of woman this is that toucheth him: for she is a sinner.

The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of Christ?

The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the communion of the Holy Ghost, be with you all.

“he will not spare in the day of vengeance” “thou givest many gifts.”
“but he that hateth gifts shall live.”
“For these be the days of vengeance”
“receive the gift of the Holy Ghost”
“thou hast thought that the gift of God”
“on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost.”
“For the gifts and calling of God”
“know that ye were Gentiles” “these dumb idols, even as ye were led”
“For by grace are ye saved” “it is the gift of God:”
“the Son of man is betrayed into the hands of sinners”
“a woman in the city, which was a sinner” “kissed his feet”
Look “betrayed into the hands of sinners” “for she is a sinner”
“the communion of the blood of Christ”
“the communion of the body of Christ”
“the communion of the Holy Ghost, be with you all.”

Bless them which persecute you: bless, and curse not.

And he saith unto me, Write, Blessed are they which are called unto the marriage supper of the Lamb. And he saith unto me, These are the true sayings of God.

“Bless them which persecute you: bless”
“Blessed are they which are called unto the marriage supper of the Lamb”

Spiderman2 said
Harold, let your priests bless the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans so anybody who touches it gets blessed.

That in blessing I will bless thee, and in multiplying I will multiply thy seed as the stars of the heaven, and as the sand which is upon the sea shore; and thy seed shall possess the gate of his enemies;

And God gave Solomon wisdom and understanding exceeding much, and largeness of heart, even as the sand that is on the sea shore.
And Solomon's wisdom excelled the wisdom of all the children of the east country, and all the wisdom of Egypt.
For he was wiser than all men; than Ethan the Ezrahite, and Heman, and Chalcol, and Darda, the sons of Mahol: and his fame was in all nations round about.

let your priests bless

That in blessing I will bless thee as the sand which is upon the sea shore

Solomon wisdom and understanding exceeding much, and largeness of heart, even as the sand that is on the sea shore.

I was raised as a Catholic, left the Church to become an atheist for the past 30 years and
I am now in the process of returning to Catholic Church actively embracing its sacraments
and doctrine. Why did I return? In general, it was a realization that there is a Supreme

Being called God and that the Catholic Church, with all its flawed history, is the
institution established by Jesus Christ to guide me how to best worship and obey the will
of God his Father.

Basically the way I came to this realization was a gift of faith and a feeling of spiritual
emptiness in my life. There are specific events and people I read about that I believe
helped inspire and reinforce this faith. These include:

-- what happened at Fatima on Oct 13, 1917
-- the image on the Guadalupe tilma particularly the supernatural reflection of the right

eye
-- the miraculous spring at Lourdes
-- the lives of people venerated by the Catholic Church such as:
Padre Pio, Father Solanus of Detroit, the Little Flower Saint Therese, Mother Theresa, St Francis of Assisi, John Paul II and many others.

Yes, there have been many flawed popes and other clergy in the 2000+ year history of the
Catholic Church and I am not always in total agreement with all its teachings, but Catholic
Church has existed longer than any other institution in the history of mankind and will
continue to do so simply because it is the true Church of God.

Harold is symbolic of what Catholicsim is all about. Qouting everything in the Bible without really understanding it. The reader gets out more confused than learned. The end result? STUPIDITY.

Now they would think that "HOLY WATER" really exists. But you know what? I would rather spit on that water than spit on a live cow. Although there is no truth to it, that cows and water are holy, I consider the cow as more "holy" than water. It has feelings you know and it can feel your hate as you spit. The water doesn't.

Comparing Hinduism and Catholicism, that is how Catholicism has become -- dumber than a dumb religion. One should use the word of God with caution or you'll end up THE MOST FOOLISH OF ALL.

Read what Grouse had said about the Bible. That is the true state of Catholicism. It has no real respect for the Bible and what Harold has been doing is just for show. Pretending to know something but nothing comes out rational from him.

Harold, let your priests bless the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans so anybody who touches it gets blessed. Why limit it to a cup? GO FIGURE IT OUT. It would do you well if you start on that one rather than misrepresenting the Bible.

Spiderman2,

Your demons are running amuck in your brain. Maybe the Pope can do an exocism on it before he leaves.

Harold, Harold, Harold,

The reality of Catholicism and Christianity in a few "to the point" paragraphs:

1. Jesus was an illiterate Jewish peasant/carpenter/simple preacher man who suffered from hallucinations and who has been characterized anywhere from the Messiah from Nazareth to a mythical character from mythical Nazareth to a mamzer from Nazareth (Professor Bruce Chilton, in his book Rabbi Jesus). Analyses of Jesus’ life by many contemporary NT scholars (e.g. Professors Crossan, Borg and Fredriksen, On Faith panelists) via the NT and related documents have concluded that only about 30% of Jesus' sayings and ways noted in the NT were authentic. The rest being embellishments (e.g. miracles)/hallucinations made/had by the NT authors to impress various Christian, Jewish and Pagan sects.

The 30% of the NT that is "authentic Jesus" like everything in life was borrowed/plagiarized and/or improved from those who came before. In Jesus' case, it was the ways and sayings of the Babylonians, Greeks, Persians, Egyptians, Hittites, Canaanites, OT, John the Baptizer and possibly the ways and sayings of traveling Greek Cynics. earlychristianwritings.com/theories.html

For added "pizzazz", Catholic/Christian theologians divided god the singularity into three persons and invented atonement as an added guilt trip for the "pew people" to go along with this trinity of overseers. By doing so, they made god the padre into god the "filicider".

2. Luther, Calvin, Smith, Henry VIII, Wesley et al, founders of Christian-based religions, also suffered from the belief in/hallucinations of "pretty wingie thingie" visits and "prophecies" for profits analogous to the myths of Catholicism (resurrections, apparitions, ascensions and immaculate conceptions).

He shall bless thy water

And ye shall serve the Lord your God, and He shall bless thy bread, and thy water; and I will take sickness away from the midst of thee.

“He shall bless thy water”

But the land, whither ye go to possess it, is a land of hills and valleys, and drinketh water of the rain of heaven:

“drinketh water of the rain of heaven”

Give ear, O ye heavens, and I will speak; and hear, O earth, the words of my mouth.
My doctrine shall drop as the rain, my speech shall distil as the dew, as the small rain upon the tender herb, and as the showers upon the grass:
Because I will publish the name of the Lord: ascribe ye greatness unto our God.
He is the Rock, his work is perfect: for all his ways are judgment: a God of truth and without iniquity, just and right is he.
They have corrupted themselves, their spot is not the spot of his children: they are a perverse and crooked generation.
Do ye thus requite the Lord, O foolish people and unwise? is not he thy father that hath bought thee? hath he not made thee, and established thee?

“My doctrine shall drop as the rain”

And when they came to Marah, they could not drink of the waters of Marah, for they were bitter: therefore the name of it was called Marah.
And the people murmured against Moses, saying, What shall we drink?
And he cried unto the Lord; and the Lord shewed him a tree, which when he had cast into the waters, the waters were made sweet: there he made for them a statute and an ordinance, and there he proved them,
And said, If thou wilt diligently hearken to the voice of the Lord thy God, and wilt do that which is right in his sight, and wilt give ear to his commandments, and keep all his statutes, I will put none of these diseases upon thee, which I have brought upon the Egyptians: for I am the Lord that healeth thee.
And they came to Elim, where were twelve wells of water, and threescore and ten palm trees: and they encamped there by the waters.

“where were twelve wells of water, and threescore and ten palm trees: and they encamped there by the waters.”

“He shall bless thy water”
“drinketh water of the rain of heaven”
“My doctrine shall drop as the rain”
“where were twelve wells of water, and threescore and ten palm trees: and they encamped there by the waters.”

He shall bless thy bread

Then all Israel gathered themselves to David unto Hebron, saying, Behold, we are thy bone and thy flesh.
And moreover in time past, even when Saul was king, thou wast he that leddest out and broughtest in Israel: and the Lord thy God said unto thee, Thou shalt feed my people Israel, and thou shalt be ruler over my people Israel.
Therefore came all the elders of Israel to the king to Hebron; and David made a covenant with them in Hebron before the Lord; and they anointed David king over Israel, according to the word of the Lord by Samuel.

Thou shalt feed my people Israel, and thou shalt be ruler over my people Israel.

The lips of the righteous feed many: but fools die for want of wisdom.

I have preached righteousness in the great congregation: lo, I have not refrained my lips, O Lord, thou knowest.

He shall bless thy bread

“Thou shalt feed my people Israel”
“The lips of the righteous feed many”
“I have preached righteousness, I have not refrained my lips”

And ye shall serve the Lord your God, and He shall bless thy bread, and thy water

“He shall bless thy water”

“drinketh water of the rain of heaven”
“My doctrine shall drop as the rain”
“where were twelve wells of water, and threescore and ten palm trees: and they encamped there by the waters.”

“Thou shalt feed my people Israel”
“The lips of the righteous feed many”
“I have preached righteousness, I have not refrained my lips”

bread= righteousness
water= My doctrine

Who knoweth not in all these that the hand of the Lord hath wrought this?
In whose hand is the soul of every living thing, and the breath of all mankind.
Doth not the ear try words? and the mouth taste his meat?
With the ancient is wisdom; and in length of days understanding.
With him is wisdom and strength, he hath counsel and understanding.

In whose hand is the soul of every living thing, and the breath of all mankind.

Soul- bread= righteousness
Breath- water= My doctrine

Harold is symbolic of what catholicism is all about.

Yet the Lord hath not given you an heart to perceive, and eyes to see, and ears to hear, unto this day.

Then I Daniel looked, and, behold, there stood other two, the one on this side of the bank of the river, and the other on that side of the bank of the river.

behold, there stood other two, the one on this side of the bank of the river, and the other
on that side of the bank of the river.

one on this side of the bank of the river
And Moses went and spake these words unto all Israel.
And he said unto them, I am an hundred and twenty years old this day; I can no more go out and come in: also the Lord hath said unto me, Thou shalt not go over this Jordan.

the other on that side of the bank of the river
Howbeit I believed not the words, until I came, and mine eyes had seen it: and, behold, the half was not told me: thy wisdom and prosperity exceedeth the fame which I heard.
Happy are thy men, happy are these thy servants, which stand continually before thee, and that hear thy wisdom.
Blessed be the Lord thy God, which delighted in thee, to set thee on the throne of Israel: because the Lord loved Israel for ever, therefore made he thee king, to do judgment and justice.

Who knoweth not in all these that the hand of the Lord hath wrought this?
In whose hand is the soul of every living thing, and the breath of all mankind.
Doth not the ear try words? and the mouth taste his meat?
With the ancient is wisdom; and in length of days understanding.
With him is wisdom and strength, he hath counsel and understanding.

In whose hand is the soul of every living thing, and the breath of all mankind.

And they went in unto Noah into the ark, two and two of all flesh, wherein is the breath of life.
And they that went in, went in male and female of all flesh, as God had commanded him: and the Lord shut him in.
And the flood was forty days upon the earth; and the waters increased, and bare up the ark, and it was lift up above the earth.
And the waters prevailed, and were increased greatly upon the earth; and the ark went upon the face of the waters.
And the waters prevailed exceedingly upon the earth; and all the high hills, that were under the whole heaven, were covered.

“And they went in unto Noah into the ark, two and two of all flesh, wherein is the breath of life.”

Give ear, O ye heavens, and I will speak; and hear, O earth, the words of my mouth.
My doctrine shall drop as the rain, my speech shall distil as the dew, as the small rain upon the tender herb, and as the showers upon the grass:
Because I will publish the name of the Lord: ascribe ye greatness unto our God.
He is the Rock, his work is perfect: for all his ways are judgment: a God of truth and without iniquity, just and right is he.

“My doctrine shall drop as the rain”

And there went a man of the house of Levi, and took to wife a daughter of Levi.
And the woman conceived, and bare a son: and when she saw him that he was a goodly child, she hid him three months.
And when she could not longer hide him, she took for him an ark of bulrushes, and daubed it with slime and with pitch, and put the child therein; and she laid it in the flags by the river's brink.
And his sister stood afar off, to wit what would be done to him.

“she took for him an ark”

Thou leddest thy people like a flock by the hand of Moses and Aaron.

I have set the Lord always before me: because he is at my right hand, I shall not be moved.
Into thine hand I commit my spirit: thou hast redeemed me, O Lord God of truth.
I looked on my right hand, and beheld, but there was no man that would know me: refuge failed me; no man cared for my soul.

“he is at my right hand”
“I looked on my right hand, and beheld, but there was no man that would know me”

She crieth in the chief place of concourse, in the openings of the gates: in the city she uttereth her words, saying,
How long, ye simple ones, will ye love simplicity? and the scorners delight in their scorning, and fools hate knowledge?
Turn you at my reproof: behold, I will pour out my spirit unto you, I will make known my words unto you.
Because I have called, and ye refused; I have stretched out my hand, and no man regarded;

“I will pour out my spirit unto you, I will make known my words unto you.”
“I have stretched out my hand, and no man regarded”

behold, there stood other two
two and two of all flesh, wherein is the breath of life.”
by the hand of Moses and Aaron

behold, there stood other two
“I looked on my right hand, and beheld, but there was no man that would know me”
“I have stretched out my hand, and no man regarded”

and, behold, the half was not told me

Blessed be the Lord thy God, which delighted in thee, to set thee on the throne of Israel: because the Lord loved Israel for ever

Now the Lord had said unto Abram, Get thee out of thy country, and from thy kindred, and from thy father's house, unto a land that I will shew thee:
And I will make of thee a great nation, and I will bless thee, and make thy name great; and thou shalt be a blessing:
And I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee: and in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed.

Blessed be the Lord thy God

And I will bless them that bless thee

“Now the Lord had said unto Abram I will bless thee.”

And Abraham was old, and well stricken in age: and the Lord had blessed Abraham in all things.

“the Lord had blessed Abraham in all things.”

Then Isaac sowed in that land, and received in the same year an hundredfold: and the Lord blessed him.

“Then Isaac sowed in that land and the Lord blessed him.”

“Now the Lord had said unto Abram I will bless thee.”
which delighted in thee

to set thee on the throne of Israel
“the Lord had blessed Abraham in all things.”

the Lord loved Israel for ever
Then Isaac sowed in that land, and received in the same year an hundredfold: and the Lord blessed him.

Blessed be the Lord thy God

And I will bless them that bless thee

Those of you who think that I'm wrong about the dogma of papal infallibility really ought to check the Catholic Encyclopedia, or any other official Roman Catholic interpretation of papal infallibility that goes beyond the childish language of schoolchildren's catechisms. Infallibility, as I have already mentioned, was accepted as dogma at the First Vatican Council in 1870. All official church teachings preceding the formal ratification of papal infallibility--such as those contained in the Apostles' Creed--also fall under the rubric of church teaching considered to be infallible. In other words, the pope does not have to make new ex cathedra proclamations about old, long-accepted church doctrines. To overturn those doctrines--say, to reject the concept of the Holy Trinity--the pope would have to make an official ex cathedra proclamation. That, of course, would never happen, since the Roman Catholic Church's claim to be the "one, true church" is based on the idea that Catholicism alone is in possession of divine authority handed down from Jesus to Peter and now residing in the hands of the former Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger.

I quite understand why a great many conservative Catholics are distressed when confronted with what the dogma of papal infallibility really means (including the fact that it is of fairly recent origin). It is, of course, a ridiculous premise that any human being is infallible on any matter whatsoever.

Some people just quote the scripture but don't understand it.

Harold is symbolic of what catholicism is all about.

Worth repeating:

The Crises (pl) in the contemporary Catholic Church:

1. The inappropriate conduct of many priests, the emotional stress on the victims and the resultant billion dollars in lawsuits.

2. The lack of talent in the priesthood.

3. The lack of Vatican response to the historic Jesus movement.

4. The Church's continuing cling to original sin and the resulting subsets of crazy ideas like limbo.

5. The denial of priesthood to women.

6. The restriction of priesthood to single men (unless you are former Episcopalian priests).

7. And the continued chain of Vatican "leadership" by old European white men.

Now therefore fear the Lord, and serve him in sincerity and in truth: and put away the gods which your fathers served on the other side of the flood, and in Egypt; and serve ye the Lord.
And if it seem evil unto you to serve the Lord, choose you this day whom ye will serve; whether the gods which your fathers served that were on the other side of the flood, or the gods of the Amorites, in whose land ye dwell: but as for me and my house, we will serve the Lord.
And the people answered and said, God forbid that we should forsake the Lord, to serve other gods;
For the Lord our God, he it is that brought us up and our fathers out of the land of Egypt, from the house of bondage, and which did those great signs in our sight, and preserved us in all the way wherein we went, and among all the people through whom we passed:
And the Lord drave out from before us all the people, even the Amorites which dwelt in the land: therefore will we also serve the Lord; for he is our God.
And Joshua said unto the people, Ye cannot serve the Lord: for he is an holy God; he is a jealous God; he will not forgive your transgressions nor your sins.
If ye forsake the Lord, and serve strange gods, then he will turn and do you hurt, and And the people said unto Joshua, Nay; but we will serve the Lord.
And Joshua said unto the people, Ye are witnesses against yourselves that ye have chosen you the Lord, to serve him. And they said, We are witnesses.
Now therefore put away, said he, the strange gods which are among you, and incline your heart unto the Lord God of Israel.
And the people said unto Joshua, The Lord our God will we serve, and his voice will we obey.
So Joshua made a covenant with the people that day, and set them a statute and an ordinance in Shechem.
And Joshua wrote these words in the book of the law of God, and took a great stone, and set it up there under an oak, that was by the sanctuary of the Lord.
And Joshua said unto all the people, Behold, this stone shall be a witness unto us; for it hath heard all the words of the Lord which he spake unto us: it shall be therefore a witness unto you, lest ye deny your God.

So Joshua made a covenant with the people that day, and set them a statute and an ordinance in Shechem.
And Joshua wrote these words in the book of the law of God, and took a great stone, and set it up there under an oak, that was by the sanctuary of the Lord.
And Joshua said unto all the people, Behold, this stone shall be a witness unto us; for it hath heard all the words of the Lord which he spake unto us: it shall be therefore a witness unto you, lest ye deny your God.

He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches; To him that overcometh will I give to eat of the hidden manna, and will give him a white stone, and in the stone a new name written, which no man knoweth saving he that receiveth it.

and will give him a white stone, and in the stone a new name written, which no man knoweth saving he that receiveth it.

Behold, this stone shall be a witness unto us; for it hath heard all the words of the Lord which he spake unto us: it shall be therefore a witness unto you, lest ye deny your God.

And at that time shall Michael stand up, the great prince which standeth for the children of thy people: and there shall be a time of trouble, such as never was since there was a nation even to that same time: and at that time thy people shall be delivered, every one that shall be found written in the book.
And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt.
And they that be wise shall shine as the brightness of the firmament; and they that turn many to righteousness as the stars for ever and ever.
But thou, O Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book, even to the time of the end: many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased.
Then I Daniel looked, and, behold, there stood other two, the one on this side of the bank of the river, and the other on that side of the bank of the river.

behold, there stood other two, the one on this side of the bank of the river, and the other on that side of the bank of the river.

one on this side of the bank of the river

And Moses went and spake these words unto all Israel.
And he said unto them, I am an hundred and twenty years old this day; I can no more go out and come in: also the Lord hath said unto me, Thou shalt not go over this Jordan.

the other on that side of the bank of the river

Howbeit I believed not the words, until I came, and mine eyes had seen it: and, behold, the half was not told me: thy wisdom and prosperity exceedeth the fame which I heard.
Happy are thy men, happy are these thy servants, which stand continually before thee, and that hear thy wisdom.
Blessed be the Lord thy God, which delighted in thee, to set thee on the throne of Israel: because the Lord loved Israel for ever, therefore made he thee king, to do judgment and justice.

pope Benedict said "we experience the obvious paradox of a multilateral consensus that continues to be in crisis because it is still subordinated to the decisions of a few."

The pope made no mention of the United States in his speech but I'm sure it's an allusion to the U.S power. At other moments on his trip, Benedict has been overtly critical of the U.S., noting how opportunity and hope have not always been available to minorities.

The U.S has almost always been a righteous country in dealing with world affairs. It spends its own money and even sacrifice its own people for the good of a foreign country and stability of the world. It has learned a lesson with Hitler that you don't let dictators grow so powerful. Without the U.S, nobody would stand against these dictators like history has showed. European Powers before had all fought wars to gain more territories.

But what did the Vatican do then? Thru-out the centruries it's been a tool of those Catholic dictators including Hitler. Even today, it has never change speaking evil of the U.S. after all of the sacrifices the U.S has done.

WAIT TILL THIS WORLD BECOMES ENMESHED IN TROUBLE AND SEE HOW THIS DEVIL POPE OR THE COMING DEVIL POPE SPEAK AGAINST AMERICA.

Like the devil, the Vatican is very wise and very cunning. SOON IT WILL SIDE WITH THE MORE THAN 12 NATIONS THAT'S GOING TO FIGHT THE U.S. and like anything which chose to fight against the legendary "Phoenix" or Prince Michael in the Bible, they will all turn into DUST.

According to most versions only one phoenix lived at a time and it renewed itself every 500 years. The U.S. uses a bird as it's symbol and it's the only country that's nearest to 500 years in existence.

Mythology or Bible prophecy, the U.S is the chosen one. Touch it and you'd burn to dust. Believe it.

Many will dare to touch it and many will turn to dust opposite of the Midas touch.

Thanet, review your facts. That piece was written 4 years ago. Maybe it's 60 percent now, not 54 %. Argentina and more others followed suit. I guess England too.

Grouse, the fact that the word infallibility was used to describe all or some of the pope's statements is stupid enough. No explanations needed.

Grouse, check this out :

"...and will give him a white stone, and in the stone a new name written, which no man knoweth saving he that receiveth it." (Revelation 2:17)

You don't have that white stone that is why you are grousing.

Harold, study Catholic history and see if the Vatican has no blood in it's hand. Millions if not billions have died because of this church.

Hating is not similar to exposing STUPIDITY. That is what the Vatican (you too) is confused about that is why they tried to annihilate people who expose their stupidity or those who want to leave their church centuries ago.

It's the STUPIDITY, s****.

Christie wrote "Gehenna, a symbolic place of eternal destruction."

The lake of fire is not symbolic, otherwise, there is no need for God to be crucified and suffer here on earth just to warn people of their coming eternal destruction. That is the reason nobody's preaching to the animals like dogs and cats coz they don't have a soul to be burned.

Ryan Haber, are you sure those family confess their sins to their priests? Or they don't because of common sense?

I need to correct the record for spiderman2 who warns us to "Beware of False Prophets".

I'm curious why you don't have the courage of your convictions and use a real name or did your mother name you after Stan Lee's comic book creation, interestingly Marvel Comics was the venue of the 1st Gay Superhero and the X-Men are a gay teen metaphor; mabe your are realy a satan worshiping homosexual in disguise and want to trick people away from the TRUE faith, or are you hiding behind the fact that you represent the Westboro Baptist Church a.k.a the "GOD HATES F_GS" military funeral protesters. I'm sure the Pentagon wants to hear from you people.

>1st, MA is not 54% Catholic more like 1/3
>Gay marraige was a fiat decree of the MA Supreme Judicial Court, not a popular measure.
>NH also now has formal state sanctioned gay marraige, passed by the state's bi-cameral legislature; a true first.
>In an irony totally ignored by the media, Spain's anti-clerical Socialist party, which was bombed into power by Al-Quida, passed gay marriage as its first act in office. So in a vary real sense Osama Bin-Laden can take credit for gay marraige in Spain. Which is one reason why the term Islamo-Marxist makes more sense than Islamo-Fascist. Yet another is that domestic opposition to counter-terrism measures in the West is chiefly from the largely Marxist Left.

Please do not censor. This needs to be corrected. Susan Jacoby. Good Lord. You have now gone from just setting forth your unsupported opinions (something most intelligent people can determine hold very little factual weight) to propogating absolute untruths with respect to the Catholic faith.

Jacoby is utterly wrong with respect to the doctrine of papal infallibity. Wrong. And this was not an original error but a later attempt to try and actually correct someone else on the post. This is just shameful as well as duplicitous. All a person has to do is Google this under the RCC Cathechism and see the language. What kind of scholar or writer or other sort of supposedly educated person throws such clearly erroneous material out there knowing that it is very simple to fact check and that there are innumerable people on the blog that know she is wrong? How can the motivation be anything but intentional.

I invite all those interested to do as noted above. Please do not pay attention to Jacoby who is completely and utterly wrong. No gray area. No room for interpretation. She is just wrong. Check the Catholic Catechism on the issue of what infallibility in faith means.

Quoting Ryan Haber:
all have one things in common. First, they persecuted the Church vigorously and boasted of its immanent demise. Second, the Church has outlived them all.

But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you;
Behold, I send you forth as sheep in the midst of wolves: be ye therefore wise as serpents, and harmless as doves.
And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature.
And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come.
Ye serpents, ye generation of vipers, how can ye escape the damnation of hell?

bless them that curse you
I send you forth as sheep in the midst of wolves: be ye therefore wise as serpents

do good to them that hate you
preach the gospel to every creature

pray for them which despitefully use you
And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world

then shall the end come.
Ye serpents, ye generation of vipers, how can ye escape the damnation of hell?

Ryan Haber

I had written a reply to you, but it has been blocked about 6 times, so I think I will give up for now.

By the way, I am not anti-Catholic; I do not have anything personal against Catholics nor feel threatened by Catholicism. I am just talking.

This is a test.

Spiderman2, I am curious. You mentioned "born again" in the punchline sense that many use that in. As if just saying it makes it so, and into heaven you go. What does that mean? They are only words. What an easy way to get to heaven. No wonder so many are going down that path.

I do not know your "born again" story but I might guess that is has something to do with a charismatic preacher who you "swooned" over. An emotional experience where you were "born again" or "saved" with some tears and hugs, and then basically life as usual with you doing all the same sinful or not so Christ-like things you have always done before being saved. With the addition of raining hellfire down onto everyone who is not you and does not use the magic words of "born again".

I hate to burst your bubble in the "Bible as only recipe to heaven", but do you know who put the New Testament of the Bible together. Do you know the group that vetted the various books and Gospels (there were more than Matt, Mark, Luke and John floating around). Do you know the group that discerned the truth or divinely inspired nature of the NT books. Do you know the group that reviewed some of the other accounts and found them not trustworthy enough to include in the sacred text. Do you know the group who copied the Bible over the millenia prior to printing presses to ensure accuracy in the text. The Roman Catholic Church.

That is probably a shock to you and others. But if the RCC had included a book in the Bible that says that Jesus Christ made his apostles have green hair, you would be walking around now with green hair. You are ignoring a 2000 year history and essentially only focusing on one part (Biblical text) and the fancy words of a modern day preacher to base your faith. You have essentially taken the 2000 year Catholic tradition and then picked somethings you liked out of it (the NT of the Bible) and rejected others. Do you understand this?

If there is anything that is born out of ignorance or falsity it is these movements based only on the slippery tongue of a single preacher and "his" interpretation of a Biblical text that was put together by the RCC.

Please spare this cite the ignorance. If you want to get educated and discuss it please do so. Until then the false religion is your, not Catholicism.

Dear Spiderman2:

According to the Bible, the “lake of fire” means the second death"—death from which there is no hope of coming back to life.
Read (Revelation 20:14).

14 And death and Hades were hurled into the lake of fire. This means the second death, the lake of fire. 15 Furthermore, whoever was not found written in the book of life was hurled into the lake of fire.
Not everyone who has ever lived will receive a resurrection. “If we practice sin willfully after having received the accurate knowledge of the truth,” states the Bible, “there is no longer any sacrifice for sins left, but there is a certain fearful expectation of judgment.” (Hebrews 10:26, 27)
Some committed sins for which there is no forgiveness. They are not in Hades (mankind’s common grave) but in Gehenna, a symbolic place of eternal destruction. (Matthew 23:33)
According to the Scriptures, the vast majority of the dead will be brought back to life on earth. (Psalm 37:29; Matthew 6:10) John wrote: “The sea gave up those dead in it, and death and Hades gave up those dead in them, and they were judged individually according to their deeds. And death and Hades were hurled into the lake of fire. This means the second death, the lake of fire.” (Revelation 20:11-14)
Those in Hades, or Sheol—mankind’s common grave—are in God’s memory. Every single one of them will be released from the grip of death. (Psalm 16:10; Acts 2:31) And each one will be judged according to the deeds he performs after he is resurrected. Death and Hades will be hurled into “the lake of fire.” This means that the death that humans inherited from Adam will no longer affect them.
We must be careful not to speculate on whether a certain person will be resurrected or not. This judgment belongs to God. He knows who is in Hades and who is in Gehenna. For our part, we do well to live our lives according to God’s will.

The Bible: I have weighed it, I have measured it, and I have found it wanting.

Only for the past year have I been an atheist. Before that I fluctuated between Christian (but not Catholic) and Deist for my whole life, simply refusing to consider a godless world.

But then I became spiritually mature enough to read the Bible objectively. I realized that all religions have irreconciliable flaws, and that neither has definite superiority over the other. All religions were made to explain the God of the Gaps, a term which has been sufficiently explained elsewhere.

Re: where is Heaven/Hell, what is the soul, what happens to it? Answer: neuroscience has eliminated this gap. The soul/spirit is created by the brain, and can be damaged by physical trauma as shown in movies such as Dr. Strangelove, Memento, and A Beautiful Mind. When we die, our "souls" die. The ancient Hebrews understood this, and there is no Heaven or Hell in the Old Testament--unless you count bizarre passages which were interpolated at the last minute. These include Enoch been "taken," Saul and the Endor Witch, and the immortal worms (?!) of Isaiah 66:24. The Sadducees of Jesus' time did not believe in afterlife, and most Jewish schools today have followed suit.

The proof an afterlife-less religion is in the Old Testament laws. Jehovah and his man Moses list the harsh criminal penalties for all law-breakers, and the worst of all is death--proof that "God" had not invented afterlife and did not need to until the Maccabeean period, when it was a matyr recruiting tool just as in Jihad today.

Here's a note on papal infallibility, a subject that is frequently misunderstood (and is misunderstood by many bloggers on this thread). The pope of the Roman Catholic Church is considered infallible on all matters of faith and morals--not only when he is speaking "ex cathedra." When the pope makes a speech to his bishops, as he did this week, denouncing secularism, he is considered infallible according to church doctrine. The dogma of papal infallibility was only codified in the nineteenth century, at the urging of Pope Pius IX.

The pope is not considered infallible on matters uninvolved with faith and morals. If the pope were to say, for example, that smoking is good for your health, no Catholic would be bound to follow his teaching. But if the pope says that condoms use is evil and contrary to "natural law" (a firm church teaching), he is considered infallible. Go figure.

Daniel in the Lion's Den,

It sounds like you've begged the question, that is, answered it in the asking. If you find a happy Catholic family, they aren't happy because they are Catholic, but because they are happy. Your evidence is that there are also happy families of other or no religions. I admit your evidence - that happy families exist around the world; I reject your conclusion because it is illogical.

I didn't contend that the only source of happiness, or the only kind of happiness, is that which flows from the Catholic Faith; for that matter, I didn't contend that the Catholic Faith's principle intent is to make our earthly lives happy.

The Catholic Faith hasn't a principle intent.

The proposition "1+1=2" hasn't a principle intent, either. It's just true. Living according to it, say, when balancing your checkbook, is more likely to lead to long term happiness, but that isn't why it's true or to be believed. It is just true, and that's why it is to be believed - even if not everyone can or will believe it.

It's something like that, albeit vastly more complicated, with the Catholic Faith. It is either true or not, and that is why it should be believed or not. Living in accordance with reality is much more likely to lead to longterm happiness, in not only finances but the entirety of life.

So back to your making a beggar of the question: if the Catholic Faith is true, then living by it will lead to greater longterm happiness, and thus produce happy families. Other families, outside of the Catholic Faith, might also be perceptive enough and wise enough to live the better part of their time in accord with reality, and thus find happiness. And to be fair, their are many Catholic Families, who even with the advantage of clear teaching to guide them, reject the teaching and thus reality, and open themselves up to all sorts of knocks on the head - banging into metaphorical walls that they insist they can wish away.

Contraception is a perfect example. Traditional peoples have generally rejected it. Agrarian societies in particular find it odious. Even now, in places like Africa and India, arms have to be twisted to secure its distribution and use. The consequence of not having contraception is having children; and even poor, those people see children as a good thing. We don't, because we'd rather have nice cars. A Hindu or Muslim or spirit-worshipping family might reject contraception realizing that it degrades women in particular by reducing them from "baby-factories" into "pleasure machines" or adds/keeps them to the economic workforce (without interruption), which means profitting others (usually men). They realize that the temptation for a husband to see his wife merely as an instrument of his pleasure increases, and with it his inclination to dispose of her when she no longer suits his immediate desires. So they reject it, and contrary to all Western "wisdom" are the happier for it. They're not that into cars. We think they are miserable because they have so many children. They think they are miserable because of oppressive foreign debts taken out on their behalf by corrupt leaders who burden them with the interest payments without sharing the infrastructure or wealth with them.

So supposing the rejection of contraception preserves intact in the mind of a family its right perception of reality - then rejecting contraception would help them be happier. But one needn't be Catholic to do that, and I never contended that one needed to be Catholic to be good, understand reality well, or acquire wisdom. Further, I never claimed that merely calling oneself "Catholic" would somehow instill happiness.

Spiderman2,

I REALLY hope you are still reading this blog. It's a shame that you don't know any Catholic families that are both faithful to the Church and happy. I know dozens, well. Do you live in the DC area? If you'ld like to, we can meet up and I'll introduce you to some of my friends. They are amazing people to hang out with. My email address is withouthavingseen at gmail dot com.

I am really serious about this. Everyone should get to meet a good Catholic family at least once in their life.

Ryan

"Claims to the possession of absolute truth are dangerous--to individual minds, societies, and the entire world. "

Is this true and are you sure?

What is the criterion for a true or a false prophet? Either ones say they are the true prophets. How can a simple mind like mine discern one from the other?

Spiderman's hellfire is so funny, hilarious. Incredible to which extent brainwashing can distort healthy wiring of a person's neurons. It reminds me of a computer crash, or a short circuit.

Does hell (or heaven) have any location?

Fire is a physico-chemical process which at a point consumes or rather transforms its matter. Eternal fire faces the fate of our beloved Olympic flame, rotfl.

Spiderman2 aka Bible Thumper, Fortune Teller and Severely Brainwashed in that Old Time Religion,
Fools are those who have read only the bible. God cannot be proud of such lazy creations!!!!
To reiterate:

What "voodooer of the hoodoo" blessed you with such stupidity in the field of fortune telling and interpretations of said stupidity???

Spiderman2:

--"It's too early for me to reveal those countries. Some fake "prophets" or enemies of the U.S. might use it to their advantage. But in due time it will be revealed. What is more important is for Pentagon to be ready for the said event. I hope they're just around reading this post."

From what I've heard about the intelligence communities' ability to monitor digital communication and in view of the hundreds of times you've used the words "nuc|3ar b0mb", I'd say there's a pretty good chance they read all of your stuff.

If you find a happy Catholic family, it is not because they are Catholic; it is because, they are, just happy.

You will find happy families everywhere, even among the Chinese, the Japanese, the Hindis, the Moslems, even, anywhere.

The setting of earthly religious practice is not what makes a person happy or unhappy.

Ryan Haber

I agree that promiscuity can be a dangerous way to live that would not bring a person happiness.

But over-thinking sex and sexuality, and enforcing a cold repression of sexuality is likewise the ruination of many lives and of many families.

Some people are born with a more sensual nature than others. To cast all such people automatically as sinful is, in my opinion, a sin. And some people are born with a more reserved nature than others. To encourage them to even deeper and deeper coldness with regards to sex and sexuality damages them psychologically, and removes from their grasp any chance for a happy life.

Sexuality is more complex than than you acknowledge. Because you have found an easy way does not mean that you are better or more disciplined or more chaste than people who have a greater struggle. It is easy for people who have an easy time to condemn others whose way is not so easy. It is like the rich condemning the poor because they are poor.

I consider your "Catholic" and "Christian" point of view to be shallow, insensitive, and inhumane. It is flawed thinking, as one of our frequent commenters likes to point out, that the human body is sinful and that sex and sexuality are innately sinful. I do not believe that.

I believe that the human body is beautiful, and that sexuality is also beautiful.

Isn't that really the great divide in America today and even in all the world? Isn't this difference of opinion what makes some people modern, and others "old-fashioned?" Isn't that what all this fighting is about among Catholics in the Catholic Church? That there is one group of people seeking to contain sexuality in themselves and in others, and another group of people who want to live and experience the lives that we set upon this earth to live?

Ryan Haber wrote " If you ever happen to meet a Catholic family that actually follows the Church's ancient teachings IN THEIR INTEGRITY, I think you will be surprised by how happy they are."

That's what I've been trying to do for years now, but like all things that is based on lies, THEY DON'T EXIST.

I HAVE NOT FOUND A SINGLE FAMILY YOU'RE DESCRIBING. If ever I found a "happy Catholic family" it is because they don't believe it's stupid doctrines taught to them. They use their common sense more than just believing Catholicism's false doctrines.

See what happened with the priests who followed your doctrines. They are single and most consider their pedophilia and sexual trysts a "given" to their lonely jobs.

THIS IS THE DEVIL'S CHURCH, BELIEVE IT OR NOT.

Naw, Daniel in the Lion's Den, YOU are exactly wrong, if I may say so. If you look at the chaos and heartache in the life of most adults who suffer such, you will see that (what the Church might call) sexuality-gone-awry is at the heart of it.

Sexuality goes right to the core of what it means to be a human, and our sexuality goes right to the heart of who we each are. By divorcing sexuality from procreation, we have reduced sexuality to a pleasure principle. The problem is that it is NOT just for pleasure, and using it as such is like using a gun to shoot flies. Sex unhinged from a permanent, fruitful commitment is bound to wound hearts. Sexuality, when open to fruitfulness, implies a willingness to self-sacrifice. Sexuality closed to fruitfulness can only be about pleasure - physical or spiritual, and we ultimately can become very heated in defense of our "rights" to pleasures. Women will feel used by their husbands, and ultimately abused or abandoned by them. Children will feel themselves accessories to their parents' egos, big houses, and other trophies, and valued only contingently because they were wanted only "to fulfill" their parents. Men will lose a sense of their manhood and its mission in the society and family, and aimlessly look for distractions and gratifications.

Sex as a pleasure principle only (even pleasure in a broad, spiritual sense such as "companionship") quickly degenerates into serial monogamy and promiscuity. Broken hearts carry heavier and heavier psychological baggage - full of anxiety and distrust in new relationships. Anger and bitterness ooze out of the ears. Hope for a lasting, intensely personal and deeply loving relationship begins to fade and is replaced by a vague contentment, a making-do with what-I've-got. We give up looking for Mr. or Mrs. Right and settle for Mr. or Mrs. Right-Now. We ultimately become cynical of the possibility of "real love" by which we mean a love that never ends.

Does any of this sound familiar to anyone?

Jesus Christ came into the world to heal it of the snare and effects of sin. Sometimes very incompetently to be sure, the Catholic Church continues his work. She seeks, among other things, to show to men and women the causes of their suffering and anxiety and reveal to them the principles by which they can be delivered from them. The Catholic Church, standing on the ancient Jewish tradition that considered children a great blessing, and in the spirit of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ who welcomed little children continues to insist that the much of humanity is thoroughly abusing its sexuality, and in doing so, hurting itself. The Church has taught for two thousand years that sexuality, being an animal function imbued in humanity with a spiritual aim, must always be in the context of permanently faithful love and open to the fruitfulness of life. The Church has constantly taught that contraception, abortion, sexually perverse acts, pornography, and fornication are all assaults on our deepest nature, on what it means to be animals with rational souls in the image and likeness of God, beings capable of procreating with the Creator to add to the number happy souls in his Kingdom. The Church has constantly warned humanity against these evils that tear away the meaning of our life as human beings. The Church will NOT stop proclaiming these truths, come hell or high water. Jesus Christ is the same, yesterday, today, and forever.

If you ever happen to meet a Catholic family that actually follows the Church's ancient teachings IN THEIR INTEGRITY, I think you will be surprised by how happy they are.

Anybody who shows a VERY HIGH REGARD for the pope who is one of THE BIGGEST LIES proclaiming himself as the VICAR OF CHRIST which he is NOT does NOT DESERVE my respect.

HUCKABEE just did and I now formally WITHDRAWS MY SUPPORT for him.

This person DOES NOT deserve the U.S Presidency.

Jonathan wrote "Michael the Archangel was simply the symbol of the Jewish nation in 165 BC"

What made you an expert in Bible prophecy? You don't even believe the Bible so how come you're now an expert?

"But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned." (1 Corinthians 2:14)

Carney wrote "Has there been, after this unprecedented surrender to the demands of the world and corrosive self-indulgent libertinism, a huge upsurge in passionately committed Anglicanism, Methodism, Presbyterianism, Congregationalism? "

Catholicism and these four mainline Protestant religions you mentioned doesn't preach the gospel of being born again. It means they are ALL FALSE RELIGIONS. You're wasting your time and money in these institutions.

Guidance of the Holy Spirit is essential for a righteous living. Being born again is having that Spirit.

"For ye have not received the spirit of bondage again to fear; but ye have received the Spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, Father." (Romans 8:15)

Beware of False Prophets

In terms of occupancy, hell is much bigger than heaven coz many will go to that place of torment compared to those who will make it to heaven. One major factor why it is so is because of false religions or false prophets who propagate it.

In Matthew 7:13-15 Jesus said "...wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction (Hell), and many there be which go in thereat; ... strait (or limited in space) is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life (Heaven), and few there be that find it. Beware of false prophets which come to you in sheep's clothing...".

The fact that God had said that many will go to hell and few to heaven just shows that these false prophets are much more effective in teaching their false doctrines than those who preach the true word of God. As a result, they have a much larger following.

It is very disappointing that many religions today use the name of Jesus Christ and that its priests or preachers act like they are His servants but in truth are really servants of the devil. It is equally disappointing that many members of these churches are easily duped into believing what they falsely teach.

Since the year 2001, four so called "Christian" nations have already legalized gay marriage. It's quite amazing that four nations (The Netherlands, Belgium, Spain and Canada) legalized it in just a span of 4 years. Next year, there could be another two or more and before we know it, other "Christian" nations would be following their lead just like popcorn. The only thing to blame in here is their practiced religion.

It should be noted that both Belgium and Spain are Catholic countries. Canada is 43% Catholic and 29% Protestant and most of its Protestant churches have linkups with the Catholic Church and other false religions thru its Ecumenical Movement. Their biggest protestant group, The United Church of Canada (UCC), previously stated that their church welcome "sexually active single adults, lesbian, gay and bisexual people into all aspects of the life and ministry of the Church". It means that they see nothing wrong with people engaged in fornication, adultery and same sex unions. If we read the Bible, these are the same people God will burn in Hell. Clearly, there are two conflicting messages here -- one from God and the other from the devil. Since their church unashamedly teach the devil's doctrine, it's more fitting that they should call their church as the United Devil's Church of Canada. That way, it would clear up things and there will be no mixups. The Netherlands, on the other hand, has become a secular state which means most of its populace has no religious affiliation. In Massachusetts, which currently is the only state in the U.S that have legalized gay marriage, 54% of its populace is Catholic and still rising..

This is just the cross-section of the kind of religions those people who supported gay marriage have. Most of them were Catholics, liberal Protestants that have linkups with other false religions and Secularists who are either aetheists or skeptics. All these religions or beliefs have one thing in common. They worship the same "God" but not the God in the Bible for in Romans 1:32 it states, "Who, knowing the judgment of God, that they who commit such things are worthy of death...".

When God speaks of death, He means everlasting hellfire. The people who approved of it never knew that they have stretched even wider what is already a very broad pathway to Hell. Most probably, they too are breezing thru that road themselves and on their way to destruction. No more stoplights for the lights or religions they attend to like the UCC have been signalling them to push on and run on full speed.

False religions are not that really hard to detect. Jesus said that "ye will know them by their fruits". So the next time another country, state or city legalizes gay marriage, examine what kind of religion those people who approved of it profess. And as sure as the sun rises from the east, those people would be either Catholic, liberal Protestants or Secularists.

When God says beware, one should not take it lightly. In Luke 12:5 Jesus said, "But I will forewarn you whom ye shall fear: Fear Him, which after he hath killed hath power to cast into hell; yea, I say unto you, Fear Him."

But what makes it more fearsome is the fact that it cannot be appealed like what other false religions want to suggest by teaching reincarnation or purgatory. The judgment of God is final and wherever He puts us in, Heaven or Hell, that would be permanent. The same is the fire and the worms crawling in one's body. They too would be permanent. The worms won't die and the fire won't quench either. It really is a place of torment and it's really very sad if some foolish religion would send somebody there.

"Beware of false prophets", said the Lord. I hope everybody would really ponder on this one.

I am not Catholic. I was raised in a part of the Jim Crowe South where Catholics were looked on with suspicion. So, I grew up not knowing much about it.

In college, I took a "Western Civilization" class, and I realized that the history of the Catholic Church is the history of Western Europe, and that all modern Protestant people who may look down with scorn upon Catholicism, should realize that all Christians owe their religious heritage to the Cathlic Church, for without it, there would be no Christianity at all in the world today.

So, even though I do not know alot about the Catholic Church, or understand it very well, I see that it is a force in a world of many forces, and that like it or not, it is part of the landscape in which we all dwell, and the Pope is an important world official, who is not going away any time soon.

If a Protestant, such as myself, makes even the tiniest observation or criticism of the Catholic Church, then Catholics often get very angry, upset, and defensive. But from my own experience, the people who are the most bitter towards Catholicism are Catholics, themselves. There is a sort of "little civil war" going on among Catholics, as though the Reformation, begun 500 years ago, is still going on, and innocent bystanders and observers, such as myself, are often hit over the head by flying debris.

I don't "get it" but I must say that Pope Benedict seems a little more impressive than I had first thought him to be. He is sort of spritely old man.

The person to contact about the dysfunctional filter process is David Waters, david.waters@wpni.com whose name and email address appear at the very bottom of the site, in the really small print.

Two more bounced. I guess WaPo has gone Fundamentalist. I guess posts complimenting follow posters on being civil is rejected. There must be a Michael shortage somewhere.

I've had a couple of mine blocked and all I was writing was a more detailed explanation of how natural selection and evolution work.

Maybe Spidey is praying for divine intervention from the Washington Post software filters......

there went one of mine too- i made a similar point about reason not being pot-boiling and exciting enough- it also included a comment of critique of ms jacoby-
hmmm,

amazingly, i was just making that exact point too- i was commenting that it is specifically arminius' gentlemanly ways- that preclude admission of his posts- and it was blocked!

Posts being blocked.

There does one of mine. Daniel, Arminius, I guess you have to keep them short, irrational, hostile, and simple-minded to get through.

I continue to be amused by the repeated assertions of self-styled Catholic liberals who seem to believe all would be right if the Church would simply relax and dispense with most traditional norms of Christian morality.

We do in fact have several good test cases of what would most likely happen. Many such denominations exist today. Unlike Catholicism, whose adherents in the U.S. have never been more numerous than now, so-called mainline protestant denominations have collapsed demographically in both relative and absolute terms since the late 1960's. The Episcopalians come particularly to mind as they are currently in the midst of a schism that has rent their community to a far greater extent than any controversy the US Catholic Church has faced, ever. The Episcopalian crisis is basically emblematic of all the mainline protestant denominations. Today's Episcopalian service typifies exactly what the Catholic left would like to make of Catholicism: post-Christian morality-muted zones with seasonal vestments and stained-glass windows.

This raises the obvious question: why doesn't the Catholic left simply throw in with that once dominant US denomination that now constitutes 2% of the population? Available seating is certainly not a problem for them; or with the UUs who are perfectly frank with their atheism, or the UCCs with all their charismatic feel-good "God damn America!" sermonizing and AIDS conspiracy theories. But perhaps the Catholic left has some ulterior motive in mind thinking they can do more damage to the institution from within.

Among protestants it is the traditional minded low-church non-liturgical creeds, Big Box Southern Baptist and store-front Pentecostals, that have witnessed the most growth in recent decades, serving one suspects as penultimate refuge for many defecting mainline protestants.

The fact that it would be remarked upon disparagingly that the U.S. Catholic church is reliant on immigrants is revelatory of the most fundamental ignorance of the situation by many of the left who opine on the state of the Church today: the U.S. Catholic church has ALWAYS been a disproportionately immigrant community from the 19th to the 20th and 21st centuries.

By way of a final devastating riposte I would observe the obvious fact that any clerical depredations that have occurred over the past half-century are totally dwarfed in both numbers and frequency by the depredations of employees of media corporations such as the Washington Post. I DARE the Washington Post, Disney-ABC, GE-NBC, Time-Warner, NewsCorp and the NYT-Globe to perform a similar comprehensive psychometric and criminological survey of its employee membership as the USCCB has done and continues with the priesthood. We would see how smug the 4th estate would end up in its judgement of the 1st. But alas I suspect corporate profit motives and fears of billion-dollar class action lawsuits from victims would preclude any such voluntary surveys, to hell with all YOUR victims. We know how the game is played.

The mainline Protestant denominations have done everything the outside attackers and inside underminers are constantly hammering at the Catholic Church to do:

embrace divorce, abortion, contraception, married clergy, homosexality, homosexual clergy, etc etc.

Has there been, after this unprecedented surrender to the demands of the world and corrosive self-indulgent libertinism, a huge upsurge in passionately committed Anglicanism, Methodism, Presbyterianism, Congregationalism?

[Laughter] Far from it; those denominations are collapsing; in crisis far graver than what faces Catholicism. (Nor, by the way, have they been at all immune from the scourge of clergy sexual misconduct).

Naturally, this central, crucial point will continue to be carefully ignored by the critics and the media.

Spiderman2 always provides entertainment.

I presume the 12 nations he refers to include Iran, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Lebanon, Russia, China, North Korea and a bunch of other perpetual problem areas, so it only takes common sense to figure out that those are the most war-likely countries. I thank him for trying help the Pentagon instead of just "staying out of it" like most preachers do.

Michael the Archangel was simply the symbol of the Jewish nation in 165 BC when the Book of Daniel was written, just as Uncle Sam symbolizes the United States nowadays. Since that book pretends to be written in 500 BC, the "prophecies" simply refer the to then-current wars of the Maccabees in 165 BC. No supernatural "future Michael" was intended, not even my own father's goofy brother of the same name. The BoD also predicts the end of the world in 96 BC (when the author could safely guess he would die before that time), but as far as anyone knows that didn't happen.

Christine,

Hmmm, you have thumped the bible well, now is all that thumping historical/authentic Jesus?????

e.g. John 5: 28,29 is according to your view a very important commentary by Jesus. Strange that such an important utterance by this simple preacher man only appears in John i.e. no other attestations as to its authenticity. Many NT exegetes have concluded that this passage was a later add-on to embellish the god in the man Jesus. The author John did this quite a bit apparently to increase Jesus' status in the Jewish and Pagan communities.

Ryan Haber wrote " The Church isn't worried that she will sink. She has the promise of her Lord that "the powers of Hell shall not prevail against it."

Well, the Lord has given this church too much extended time already to repent. But sadly it has never learned. It will commit another grave mistake and that would be its last straw. The Vatican, which is the seat of satan, will be destoyed soon together with the other major stupid doctrines in this world.

The "powers of hell" (gates of hell) refers mainly to Catholicism as it tried to extinguish thru wars and execute those saints whose "fault" were just spreading the Bible and the gospel of Christ. And guess what, the Bible is still spreading and the saints it produced are still aplenty.

This is the devil's church and Jacoby, although an atheist, was accurate in it's description that this is truly a SINKING SHIP.

Abandon ship or face the coming wrath of God.

Christie, the literal Hell is the lake of fire.

Dear Spiderman2:

There is a literal hell. As I pointed out from the Bible, it is the common grave of mankind. Sometimes hell in the Bible is symbolic. It sounds as if you believe that hell is a literal fiery, everlasting burning torment. That is not a Bible teaching.

Separating fire from Hades, or hell, the Scriptures say: "Death and Hades were hurled into the lake of fire." "The lake" mentioned here is symbolic, since death and hell (Hades) that are thrown into it cannot literally be burned. "This [lake of fire] means the second death" (death from which there is no hope of coming back to life).read Revelation 20:14.
The lake of fire has a meaning similar to that of "the fiery Gehenna [hell fire, King James Version]" that Jesus spoke of. (Matthew 5:22; Mark 9:47, 48) Gehenna occurs 12 times in the Christian Greek Scriptures, and it refers to the valley of Hinnom, outside the walls of Jerusalem. When Jesus was on earth, this valley was used as a garbage dump, "where the dead bodies of criminals, and the carcasses of animals, and every other kind of filth was cast." (Smith's Dictionary of the Bible) The fires were kept burning by adding sulfur to burn up the refuse. Jesus used that valley as a proper symbol of everlasting destruction.
As does Gehenna, the lake of fire symbolizes eternal destruction. Death and Hades are "hurled into" it in that they will be done away with when mankind is freed from sin and the condemnation of death. Willful, unrepentant sinners will also have their "portion" in that lake. (Revelation 21:8) They too will be annihilated forever. On the other hand, those in God's memory who are in hell (the common grave of mankind) have a marvelous future.
Revelation 20:13 states: "The sea gave up those dead in it, and death and Hades gave up those dead in them." Yes, the Bible hell will be emptied. As Jesus promised, "the hour is coming in which all those in the memorial tombs will hear [Jesus'] voice and come out." (John 5:28, 29) Although no longer presently existing in any form, millions of dead ones who are in Jehovah God's memory will be resurrected, or brought back to life, in a restored earthly paradise. Read Luke 23:43; Acts 24:15.
In the new world of God's making, resurrected humans who comply with his righteous laws will never need to die again. (Isaiah 25:8) Jehovah "will wipe out every tear from their eyes, and death will be no more, neither will mourning nor outcry nor pain be anymore." In fact, "the former things [will] have passed away." (Revelation 21:4) A blessing is in store for those in hell ("the memorial tombs"). This blessing indeed is reason enough for us to take in more knowledge of Jehovah God and his Son, Jesus Christ. Read John 17:3.

The problem with the Catholic Church and sexuality goes back to St. Paul.

Professor Chilton pulls no punches in criticizing one of the founders of Christianity. Basically Paul was a "prude". An excerpt for Chilton's book,

"He (Paul) feared the turn-on of women's voices as much as the sight of their hair and skin..... At one point he even suggests that the sight of female hair might distract any "pretty wingie talking fictional thingies" in church attendance (1 Cor. 11:10). Simply add Paul's thinking about women to the list of flaws in the foundations of Christianity.

Professor Chilton btw is a Professor of Religion at Bard College and a priest at the Free Church of St. John in Barrytown, NY.

Ryan Haber

You are EXACTLY WRONG.

The Catholic Church's coldness towards human sexuality is a shame, even a tragedy. That goes for most of Christianity, and Islam, as well.

This cold repression of a wonderful aspect of humanity will probably be the ultimate destruction of relgion, more than any logical analysis regarding the existence or non-existence of God.

Nero
Domitian
Trajan
Marcus Aurelius
Septimus Severus
Decius
Valerian
Diocletian
Julian the Apostate (mmm... what a good word, would that we used it more often to call a spade a spade)
Alaric
Attila the Hun
Henry II of England
Frederick II of the HRE
Philip IV of France
John Calvin of Geneva
Mehmet the Conquerer
Henry VIII of England
Edward VI of England
Elizabeth I of England and William Cecil
Shogun Taicosama of Japan
Shogun Daifusama of Japan
William and Mary of Orange
Pierre Claude François Daunou
Henri Grégoire
Napoleon Bonaparte
Benito Juarez
Plutarco Calles
Manuel Azaña
Adolf Hitler
Mao Tsetung
Joseph Stalin

all have one things in common. First, they persecuted the Church vigorously and boasted of its immanent demise. Second, the Church has outlived them all.

Ms. Jacoby, the single most decisive reason for the departure of millions of Americans from the Church has been their acceptance of the sexual revolution (note, I did not write "equal rights for women," the diguise under which the revolution has been marketed very successfully). The sexual revolution is completely incompatible not only with Christian morals, but with the morals of all traditional peoples. You yourself get at this point: the Vatican II Council "aroused the hopes of many Catholics who wanted the church to abandon its strictures against contraception and divorce, who wanted priests to be able to marry, and who later wanted women admitted to the priesthood."

With the exception of priestly celibacy, these issues all get very much at the core of the traditional Christian view of the world. The Church isn't going to change them because they aren't hers to change. They are entrusted to her by Jesus Christ and the ancientest Jewish tradition in whose context He lived and moved. The Church's job isn't to swim with the cultural currents. Coincidentally, those Christian groups that have turned themselves over to cultural mores haven't solved their problems in doing so: a number of mainline Protestant churches, for instance, have clergy shortage crises as severe per capita, and sexual abuse issues underreported but more dramatic than our own.

The Church isn't worried that she will sink. She has the promise of her Lord that "the powers of Hell shall not prevail against it." She trusts and follows her Lord, haltingly, stutteringly, weakly to be sure, and with traitors in our midst, but faithfully all the same.

The Church's job, in the words of Mother Teresa, is not to be successful, but faithful. She - we - do our best to stand with Jesus Christ in every generation. "Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and for ever," (Heb 13:8).

The more I think of it, the madder I get. Spiderman gets all of his manic rants posted, but Arminius and I get censored. I realize that there is no "person" censoring us, but that it is just some sort of software filter, running amuck.

In her current essay, Susan acknowledged at the end that there have appareetnly been some software problems. But things are not getting better; things seem to be getting worse.

I have sent a few emails to the Washington Post asking to explain what is going on. The reply to all, is that they were not aware that anything is wrong. So, the problem is, no one there reads this stuff at all, because if they did, they would surely notice all of the many complaints and gripes people have.

Perhaps this will make it; and perhaps it will not.

The Washington Post blocks my posts, too, and sometimes it removes my posts after it posts them. There does not seem to be any reason.

The person to contact about it is David Waters, david.waters@wpni.com and email address appears at the very bottom of the site, in the really small print.

c ya later guys. have a nice day

Daniel in the lion's den without lions. Just him, alone, and chained. Chained in his own ignorance.

Roar, Daniel, roar. Let them hear what you've got.

Lots of loud bellow but no substance.

Arminius is amused by your act. Keep doing it.

"The lion is fat, the lion is thin". Can't you guys be creative a bit?

Say, "the lion is dancing and biting his nails."

The two of you are so boring that even this blog's filters blocks your posts.

Daniel, I agree with you. WaPo just blocked my longer post.

Poor Spiderman. I don't think we should be angry at him; he seems confused. When a person becomes manic enough, there is usually some kind of intervention, either from concerned family, or even the police. This happened to someone in my own family. It cn be very frightening, and even though it is tempting to mock this guy, in reality, what is happening to him is not very funny.

Spiderman2 aka Canyon Shearer,

Seek an exorcism your "demons of the demented" are out of control!!!!!

In one third world country where population explosion has become a major problem, Catholic chapels or centers offer free operation to untie the fallopian tubes of mothers after indoctrinating them that it's a SIN.

This devilish Church invent their own doctrines so parents would produce more chiildren despite their abject poverty.

They then teach these poor people that their government is the cause of their poverty due to corruption but lo and behold those same government personnel are usually "devout catholics".

Some revolt which cause more poverty and this has become a "CATHOLIC CYCLE" which I presume is routinely duplicated around the world.

To escape poverty, many go abroad adding more economic pressure to their host countries.

Joseph, the son of Jacob, saved Egypt and his family because of the advance warning he got from God. He saved Egypt from seven years of famine.

I hope the Pentagon gets interested with the information I have. It will save them a lot of guesswork. Guesswork and lives too.

If the Pentagon is interested, I can reveal it to them exclusively. It would save them lots of lives if they would listen.

The Bible is for the U.S. to use and not for the enemies. I hope the Pentagon would take advantage of the knowledge I got.

Sorry Geogiason, I didn't notice I wrote that double negative.

It's too early for me to reveal those countries. Some fake "prophets" or enemies of the U.S. might use it to their advantage. But in due time it will be revealed. What is more important is for Pentagon to be ready for the said event. I hope they're just around reading this post.

Spiderman2 wrote: "For me it's a very accurate prophecy. I even provided you with a clue and yet you're not unable to figure it out. Im not surprised. Stupidity has no cure."

Do we dare point out to Spidey the stupidity in the gross grammatical error he made in his statement that leaves him saying the opposite of what he obviously intended?

And is this thread going to play out without Spidey ever revealing those 12 nations that will make war on the US?

Spiderman

What is wrong with you? You seem manic.

In one third world country where population explosion has become a major problem, Catholic chapels or centers offer free operation to untie the fallopian tubes of mothers after indoctrinating them that it's a SIN.

This devilish Church invent their own doctrines so parents would produce more chiildren despite their abject poverty.

They then teach these poor people that their government is the cause of their poverty due to corruption but lo and behold those same government personnel are usually "devout catholics".

Some revolt which cause more poverty and this has become the CATHOLIC CYCLE which I presume is routinely duplicated around the world.

To escape poverty, many go abroad adding more economic pressure to their host countries.

Popey the Pope:

(Kudos to the late, great Ross Bagdasarian aka David Seville):

My friend the witch doctor, he taught me what to say
My friend the witch doctor, he taught me what to do
I know that you’ll be mine when I say this to you
Oh, Baby ….

Ooo eee, ooo ah ah ting tang
Walla walla, bing bang
Ooo eee, ooo ah ah ting tang
Walla walla, bing bang

The most blaring fault with the Catholic church is that its clergy doesn't practice family values (but preaches them).

Christie wrote : "The rendering at Luke 16:19-31 mentions torment, but the entire account is symbolic in meaning. "

Well, if that is true, the Lord would not have wasted His time on earth just to be vilified and crucified. But the Creator had endured all those because He understood the severity of the punishment in Hell.

I too would not waste my time a bit in this blog if Hell is just symbolic and not literal. Your idea of hell as symbolic is a big lie.

I would be most glad if hell is not true but I don't want to delude myself.

It would be so pleasant if this blog had a filter to weed out the rants of the incoherent and hateful. Of course, most of these people are either mentally unhinged or do it deliberately just to be annoying.

O well, life in the Age of Unreason.

And incivility.

Former Christian wrote "Maybe Spidey is the only one to understand him. It may be that they have this special connection whereby Spidey can interpret the bible in a way that no human being has ever before and rafamdergem is able to right something that only Spidey can understand."

The Bible prophecied that Islam would someday rule the world for a time. I dread the day when a lot of rafamdergem would be doing that. Imagine stupidity at its worst will rule the world? And thanks to atheist and evolutionist countries lending its hand to make that happen. And yes, there'll be catholic and anglican countries too. Doomsday will be preceeded by the global reign of stupidity.

Stupidity will ruin this world. IF YOU THINK THAT EVOLUTION AND FALSE RELIGION IS HARMLESS, IT'S NOT.

Dear Spiderman2:
I agree hell is real. In the King James Version, the Greek word Hades is rendered "hell" in each of its ten occurrences in the Christian Greek Scriptures. The rendering at Luke 16:19-31 mentions torment, but the entire account is symbolic in meaning.
The Hebrew word Sheol occurs 65 times in the Hebrew Scriptures and is rendered "hell," "grave," and "pit" in the King James Version.
The condition of the dead is made clear at Ecclesiastes 9:5, 10, where we read: "The dead know nothing . . . In the grave, where you are going, there is neither working nor planning nor knowledge nor wisdom." (New International Version) Scripturally, death is a state of nonexistence. The dead have no awareness, no feelings, no thoughts.
Since the dead have no conscious existence, hell cannot be a fiery place of torment where the wicked suffer after death. Examining what happened to Jesus after he died helps to understand what hell is. The Bible writer Luke recounts: "Neither was [Jesus] forsaken in Hades [hell, King James Version] nor did his flesh see corruption." (Acts 2:31) Where was the hell to which even Jesus went? The apostle Paul wrote: "I handed on to you . . . that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures; and that he was buried, yes, that he has been raised up the third day according to the Scriptures." (1 Corinthians 15:3, 4) Jesus was in hell, the grave, but he was not abandoned there, he was resurrected.
Consider also the case of the righteous man Job, who suffered much. Wishing to escape his plight, he pleaded: "Who will grant me this, that thou mayest protect me in hell [Sheol], and hide me till thy wrath pass?" (Job 14:13, Douay Version) Job didn’t desire to go to a fiery-hot place for protection. To Job, "hell" was simply the grave, where his suffering would end. The Bible hell, then, is the common grave of mankind where good people as well as bad ones go.
If I die before the great tribulation, I too will go to hell, the common grave of mankind.

Former Christian wrote "Maybe Spidey is the only one to understand him. It may be that they have this special connection whereby Spidey can interpret the bible in a way that no human being has ever before and rafamdergem is able to right something that only Spidey can understand."

The Bible prophecied that Islam would someday rule the world for a time. I dread the day when a lot of rafamdergem would be doing that. Imagine stupidity at its worst will rule the world? And thanks to atheist and evolutionist countries lending it's hand to make that happen. And yes, there'll be catholic and anglican countries too. Doomsday will be preceeded by the global reign of stupidity.

Stupidity will ruin this world. IF YOU THINK THAT EVOLUTION AND FALSE RELIGION IS HARMLESS, IT'S NOT.

Just to stir up a little more intelligent discussion in another directions:

Prior to the Reformation in the early 1500's, the Catholic Church was the premier power in Europe. The Reformation was a done deal by the Peace of Wesphalia, in 1648. So, that is about 150 years of real slippage; during the struggle of that time, political power slipped away, permanently, from the Catholic Church.

About another 140 years later, when the French Revolution began in the 1790's, the Catholic Church, was finally threatened with permanent extermination, and after that, all Church policies were in reaction to that new reality. The Catholic Church of the 19th century always sided with the old system of monarchical governments, and resisted the rise of democracy and the rights of man, and in fact, earned the reputation, that it still has to this day, to be against anything new or modern.

But the Catholic Church of today is not that old reactionary Church of the 19th century. Because in 1945, when faced with almost certain political destruction, it was revived in the care of the benevolent Italian Republic, and even granted a perfunctory sovereignty, and now has a new chance for life, free of all the Machiavellian entanglements of power politics.

The Catholic Church has a chance in this modern world to do better than it has done in the past. I wish it would

Israel is here, USA is here, UK is here, Japan is here, Russia is here, Italy is here, VAtican is here, France is here, Germany is here, Venice is here, Sweden is here, Finland is here, Austria is here, Suudi Arabia is here, Iran is here, MAsonry is here, Turks are here, Kurds are here, Armenians and Greeks are here, there are European Union, United Nations, NATO, Russia, United Kingdom.

one year ago there was Armageddon. but it is not fate. it is realization of mass consciousness. and i shall not tell you the ten years and thirty years yet, maybe later.

Daniel,

"Catholicism is just part of the landscape of my world; I would pass by a Catholic Church, without even noticing, and if I should become aware that a friend, aquaintance or in-law of mine is Catholic, I must say, that it would hardly mean anything to me"

this is what i cannot say here in Anadolu.

I agree with Fate. It seems to me like Spidey boy can pull a verse from the bible and intimate that he understands what God was really saying.

He reminds me of someone I knew who had little self esteem and at one point, tried to convince people that knew him that he was JC coming back a second time. This was shortly before his complete nervous breakdown.

And the drivel coming from rafamdergem is as bad or worse. If there is supposed to be coherent ideas being posted, I don't see them. In fact, if one of my three boys had turned in a middle school paper with this kind of thought and cohesion, there would be no XBox for a week and certainly I would have made them do it over.

Maybe Spidey is the only one to understand him. It may be that they have this special connection whereby Spidey can interpret the bible in a way that no human being has ever before and rafamdergem is able to right something that only Spidey can understand.

Since I was not brought up Catholic, I do not understand it well, and do not think too much about it and do not have alot to say about it.

I was always taught that the Catholic Church was the first Christian Church during the time of the Roman Empire, and the modern Catholic Church has vestiges of the old Imperial Roman organization in it, and that the Catholic Church gathered up what was left of the Classical Greco-Roman world, and carried it over the Middle Ages to the Rennaissance, and modern times.

And that the modern Catholic Church now exists without any power of its own, but is cradled in modern Italy, that cares for it, benevolently, where its physical presence is guarded, safe and sound. And that the Vatican is granted some sort of vestigal sovereinty, as a nod to its former glory and power, and that the Pope is, therefore, also, a head of state.

Like the British Monarch, the Pope is an antique, attracting fascinated attention.

I hope this does not make me seem anti-Catholic. Catholicism is just part of the landscape of my world; I would pass by a Catholic Church, without even noticing, and if I should become aware that a friend, aquaintance or in-law of mine is Catholic, I must say, that it would hardly mean anything to me.

Yet I must note, that most of the very harsh anti-Catholic sentiment that I ever hear comes from Catholics, or from ex-Catholics. When the previous Pope was dying, and they were chosing the new Pope, I was very interested in this, to me, exotic and foregin custom, but my Catholic friends and aquaintances were harsh and unyielding in their bitter, sometimes, very bitter, condemnation of the "whole operation."

To be honest, I think it is striking how harsh most Catholics (that I know, at least) seem to regard the Catholic Church.

i tell here what i see at nights and days, in front of my eyes, sometimes because of electromagnetics and planets, and authorities consider they are physical.

they didnt experience electromagnetics and computers after 1991 here. they are in Suudi Arabia, and Bodrum too, they can pay 3.200.000 USD for a Black Camel.

and they dont know how Israel treats who are in Bodrum electromagnetically for Ankara and Temple of Solomon.

Israel accepts they are muslim. Vatican accepts they are muslim. who are we then in Anadolu? Augustinian Thomists or Thomist Augustinians?

Worth Repeating:

The Crises in the contemporary Catholic Church:

1. The inappropriate conduct of many priests, the emotional stress on the victims and the resultant billion dollars in lawsuits,

2. The lack of talent in the priesthood.

3. The lack of Vatican response to the historic Jesus movement.

4. The Church's continuing cling to original sin and the resulting subsets of crazy ideas like limbo.

5. The denial of priesthood to women.

6. The restriction of priesthood to single men (unless you are former Episcopalian priests),

7. And the continued chain of Vatican "leadership" by old European white men.

Fate, Ottomans after 1800 didnt hesitate to murder 90.000 people of one faith but other than governmental faith,

Fate, Ottomans after 1800 didnt hesitate to murder mass number of people "they are against the holy government and they may be murdered". it is not about Armenians. i am speaking about the character and approach.

Grandson of Ahmet prophet is not against one group. not from East not from West.

maybe you know President of Turkey has been representative besides Suudi Arabia to stop the execution of a man in turkish republic nationality that Arabs sentenced, for He cursed to Arab's Allah. there was not any representative for Europe and people in Anadolu then.

rafamdergem wrote: "and Fate, if you find a solution to heal 1000-1900 AC, tell me. do you know how a drunk man is after he is sober?"

What in God's name are you talking about Raf?

Communication requires both the speaker and the listener to hear and understand what is being said. If you are only talking to yourself, then please do that elsewhere. If you are talking to people on this board, please speak so you can be understood.

and Fate, if you find a solution to heal 1000-1900 AC, tell me. do you know how a drunk man is after he is sober?

in this city, grandson of Ahmet prophet is resident. He died of plague disease. His wife, His friends, Father and Mother in LAw, died in front of His eyes.

every day i go to visit Him. once i heared Him say "please work to finish the plague".

Spderman:

Do they win a prize for being the most evil, like a year's supply of Rice-o-roni, or something?

spiderman2 wrote: "c ya later guys. And thanks to that rafam guy. He just convinced me right now that Islam is the most evil and not catholicism."

One guy convinced you? One guy, on a blog, who wrote many postings in another language? That *convinced* you? Wow, I see that small minds are easily "convinced" by very little.

Spiderman, if You are Christian, thank God, if You see a Muslim, tell him that Ahmet prophet had been educated by a Christian. and there weree Apostels and Saints in the 600 years before Ahmet prophet.

c ya later guys. And thanks to that rafam guy. He just convinced me right now that Islam is the most evil and not catholicism.

"And at that time shall Michael stand up, the great prince which standeth for the children of thy people.." (Daniel 12:1)

For me it's a very accurate prophecy. I even provided you with a clue and yet you're not unable to figure it out.

Im not surprised. Stupidity has no cure.

The Bible does not speculate coz if it does then it has no power. If you continue on that unbelief, there is no speculation if you will go to hell or not. 100 percent sure, you will, just as 100 percent accurately It can name those more than 12 countries without a single mistake.

That last post was by me.

The Bible does not speculate coz if it does then it has no power. If you continue on that unbelief, there is no speculation if you will go to hell or not. 100 percent sure, you will, just as 100 percent accurately I can name those more than 12 countries without a single mistake.

Here's my guess of 5, Spidey:

Monaco, San Marino, Andorra, Liechtenstein, and the Marshall Islands.

Such an alliance would make America tremble!

You really should have been a stand-up comic, Spidey. You wouldn't even need to come up with any new material

Is it that hard to guess just 5? I thought it was just some kind bathroom ritual.

spiderman2: "Fate, Give it a shot then. Name just 5 and let's see how scientific is your guess. Or is it just hogwash probability that you are using?"

We can speculate on what will happen in the future. I have no predictions. However you seem to have a specific prediction. Why are you unwilling to give us the specifics? Why be so vague? Put up or shut up spidy.

ben nevis wrote: "Well Susan, that was quite a load of buckshot you unloaded there. You hit every target! In rereading your piece I've concluded that you are a very "bitter" person."

Most former catholics are bitter, especially those who went to Catholic School. I remember asking questions or pointed out contradictions to the teachers and getting a ruler slapped across my knuckles. Catholicism is not a friendly place, especially to questioning Catholics.

After growing up in it, learning its messages of peace and love, then getting my hand slapped, or otherwise punished or made to feel guilty when inside I did not feel guilt, gets to a person on the inside.

Yea, I imagine she is bitter, and rightly so. But my feelings were more of betrayal, that as a good Catholic I would be viewed with suspiscion, slapped when asking a valid question, and otherwise oppressed and judged by those who taught love and peace. Sorta like finding out your president cares less for the constitution than a roll of toilet paper. Betrayal.

One quick example. In elementary catholic school we were taught to stop what we were doing when an ambulance siren was heard and pray for whoever was in the ambulance. I thought it was a fine idea. But one time a student did not act quickly enough to start praying after we heard the siren. He was too caught up in what we were reading to notice the siren. As we all prayed for the person in the ambulance the nun was using her fists on the poor student. Yea, I guess bitter is what one becomes when your religion is exposed to be hypocritical on a daily basis, especially when you believe what the religion teaches but do not accept how it is practiced.

Fate, Give it a shot then. Name just 5 and let's see how scientific is your guess. Or is it just hogwash probability that you are using?

What I'm saying is these more than 12 countries at ONE TIME that's going to war. Not a succession of wars.

The Bible knows all sorts of things besides the ominous upsurge of Michaels. How does the Bible do it?

Here’s a theory: The Bible is the word of God – a god who hasn’t put anything in writing for over 2,000 years, and who chooses, in his mysterious omniscience, to give us hints via oblique biblical passages interpreted by modern-day followers who claim to know what God is thinking.

spiderman2 wrote: "What if I say that the U.S will battle more than 12 countries at once? Would that be a very accurate prediction?"

No. Not in today's world. And remember somethng simalar has already happened. During WW2 the US fought the Axis which included six nations. A war with the Warsaw Pact (thank God it never happened) would have involved being at war with 8 nations, one of which was the Soviet Union which has since broken up into 15 nations itself.

spiderman2 wrote: "Did it come to your mind that it will happen and was that as easy as your bathroom rituals?"

The US has been at war the following periods of time:

American revolution - 1775-1782
The War of 1812 - 1812-1814
Mexican-American War - 1846-1848
Civil War - 1861-8165
Spanish American War - 1898
World War I - 1917-1918
World War II - 1941-1945
Korean War 1950-1953
Vietnam 1962-1975
Gulf War - 1991-1992
Afganistan - 2002-present
Iraq 2003-present

I think that makes predicting future American wars about up there with going to the bathroom.

spiderman2 wrote: "Do you know what are those more than 12 countries? Can you name them?"

Why would I care about your prediction considering on another blog you showed complete ignorance of biology, math and DNAs yet spoke ask an expert.

spiderman2 wrote: "Im just using the number 12 to hide the clues but I can even name the exact number of countries and which one."

Of course you are. Making soft predictions puts you in the class of soothsayer. Put them here and if it comes true we will take a second look. Leave it vague and we will ignore you.

spiderman2 wrote: "Just hang on there coz it would be revealed when the time is ripe. I hope Pentagon listens so they won't be so vulnerable."

"The time is ripe", haha. That usually means attributing your vague prediction to the past. Hmmm, forget soothsayer. People used to seek them out for advice, advice that was usually pretty good. I think you're in a different class spidy, one all by yourself.

Well Susan, that was quite a load of buckshot you unloaded there. You hit every target! In rereading your piece I've concluded that you are a very "bitter" person.

Neal wrote " Let me know when you're 82.7387% sure, OK? "

Sure, if you're referring about Vatican's destruction, I'm 95% sure.

With Catholicism's demise altogether, I'm not so sure about that. Nobody can't weed out stupidity 100% from this earth, can we?

How can the Bible know that America would be using the name Michael foremost during this time of it's existence? And it won't last that long coz as what one poster said, it's not the most common name of American babies now. It only proves that that prophecy of destruction is gonna occur in this generation and not much later. Have you thought of that?

Jonathan wrote : "Someone here mentioned the restoration of Israel in 1948 as a prophecy come true. But I already refuted this as a self-fulfilling prophecy because the founding fathers used the Bible as a how-to guide. "

Well, how do you explain that I can specifically name the more than 12 countries that's going to war in the future? Is that a how-to-guide also?spiderman2

Neal wrote: "I agree with others here that the decline in Catholic Church membership is largely due to purely demographic, rather than doctrinal reasons."

I'm sure that is part of it, but I blame the cultural revolution here in America during the late 60s and 70s and the church's failure to address the growing freedoms people started enjoying. As hippies were tripping out, music got louder and raunchier, dresses got shorter, sex got freer, and schools, the military and worksites integrated, the church came down pretty hard (except school integration where many parents reacted by sending their children to white catholic schools because they did not integrate). There was Vatican II of course, but that helped little. People enjoyed their freedom from the social oppression of the 40s and 50s, which the church tried to maintain. It tried to bring the kids into church of course with guitar music at the late service, but once they came the pointing at short skirts, long hair and other superficial things were addressed, so many stayed away.

Neal wrote: "Catholic families have been birthing fewer Catholics since at least the 50's and rather than debating their members on deep doctrinal issues, most priests seem to spend most of their time just trying to get Catholics to understand the basic tenets of their religion (a job once performed primarily by nuns.)"

But there are more catholics today in Amerca than there were in the 1950s. Lets face it, Americans lost the entrenched bigotry, became tolerant of other people, their beliefs, their dress, and their politics. The 1960s was a revolution in freedom from the oppressive nature of the 1950s. The church is still intolerant of other faiths. It feels it can make moral judgements on a whim and that sinfulness is something it determines, and can speak out about it or cover it up when it happens to their employees. Americans are freer today and better educated. The church's mainstay of guilt and judgements just can't sway people like that and so has lost many.

As Jacoby says in her article, if the church freed itself and allowed priests and nuns to marry, open up to all classes of society, stop segregating its membership, actually did some noticable charitable work at the local levels, then the church would see a resurgence. What is killing the catholic church is its own oppressive policies on its own members, policies that have nothing to do with the bible or Jesus' teachings and more to do with the Council of Nicea 300 years after Christ and Constantine's oppressive forced spread of Roman christianity and its continued need to spread. And as the more liberal minded have been driven out, the more conservative minded, those who admire strict policies and enforcement, have been attracted, and so today a conservative pope is no surprise. But this pope would never have help free Poland or Latin America from oppressive communism, a shining example of what catholicism, when done right, when acting inclusively, when pointing out oppression where it exists, when acting based on the bible and not its own rules made up outside of the bible, has the power to do.

To rafamdergem:

Is there any purpose to your posts or do you just like to take up space?

I'm no apologist for the Catholic Church, having "lapsed" many years ago and finding it difficult to understand how anybody could believe its Medieval claims, but I must say that it is no worse, and in many ways better, than fundamentalist Christianity. After all, the Catholic Church is not at war with science the way fundamentalists are. It doesn't deny evolution. It doesn't claim that creation is only 6,000 years old. It doesn't make a concerted effort to establish a theocracy in the United States. On the other hand, it seems to struggle in industrialized countries, I suspect because in its reliance on atmosphere and magic (though it wouldn't call it that), it appeals to cultures that are somewhat backward.

The only thing Islam and Muhammad added to Christianity was violence and cruelty to women.

Some people just don't know how to treasure their pivileges. It's a mix of insanity and stupidity let loose.

Islam is the most EVIL I guess. Hands down.

Spiderman, Pope Benedictus is feeding Prime Minister and President of Turkey.

Spiderman aka Canyon Shearer like many of us suffers from the Three B Syndrome. In his case, he was Bred, Born and Brainwashed in his "red necked" religion. For this reason, he is unable to think past the shackles of the OT and NT forever rambling about the myths and fiction of these two books guided apparently by his many "demons of the demented".

Spiderman2 wrote:

"If I or Jacoby were doing this argument against the Catholic Church just 4 centuries ago, both of us would have been burned at the stake for heresy. The difference is not because of doctrinal change but because they lost the power to do so. Speaking of aggressiveness, this church has really not changed but is just forced into submissiveness (not from within but from outside). Untie the knot and see how fierce this leviathan is."

Very true. Its ironic that it has never moderated its virulent attacks on human beings, science and knowledge except when it has been forced to capitulate to superior moral forces. Burning, the garrote, censorship, and inquisitory threats against science, [Galileo for example] are the hallmarks of its so called "morality".

It should also be pointed out that the catholic's road to heaven has been paved with the blood and corpses of the men women and children who for centuries have been butchered to advance the church's "morality" in the name of the "all merciful father" and the "prince of peace".

If Catholicism is evil, you're showing that Islam is the most evil.

rafamdergem:,

This a a blog on catholicism and not Islam. Please go to Eboo's page and place your "observations" there. Please don't terrorize this page.

Daniel in the Lion's Den wrote "a stream of sensless, paranoid babbling from people like him? "

Stupidity has no cure. Im interested which one did I say is senseless? Based on your previous posts, I assume you live a senseless life. How in the world do you know what is sensible then?

So far, the atheist I saw as having very sensible post here is from "A Different Point of View". Can't you guys think the same way as he does? Use your brains , would you?

To JIMBO56, whose posts undeniably reflect the mentality of the Catholic True Believer. He wrote, inter alia:
“… the Catholic faith is universal in it's beliefs.” For the record, I deeply resent the narrow minded and bigoted Catholic view that I and billions of other human beings will never get to heaven because we do not believe what Catholics believe. I abhor and denounce Pope Benedict’s recent public reaffirmation of this outlook. I find it hard to believe that any person supposedly infused with deep spiritual feelings could hurl such an in-your-face insult at all non-Catholics. I cannot imagine any other person on the face of God’s earth being allowed to get away with such a bigoted, flagrantly discriminatory statement. (Imagine the Ku Klux Klan Granddragon saying: “Only white people will get to heaven. The rest of you are out of luck.”)

“when a Pope make a statement or prints an encyclical, it's the inspired word of God. So, Benedict's encyclicals on 'Love' are what's infallible, not him as a human.” Well, I’m glad you explained this is a totally objective way that does not simply beg the question. Using the same approach—i.e., whatever I believe constitutes objective truth—let me state the Protestant viewpoint. When a Protestant preacher states that it’s phony baloney for anyone to believe that individuals need a priesthood standing between them and God, the preacher is speaking the inspired word of God. So, the preacher’s preaching is what’s infallible, not him as a human.

“even though society and the world may change, what is right and wrong don't.” So, what exactly is the Catholic Church’s position on:
-- All Jews at all times bear a blood libel for killing Christ
-- Is the sun or the earth the center of the solar system?
-- Burning witches at the stake
-- Subjecting human beings to torture to root out the heretics and Satan worshipers
-- The right of Christians to singlehandedly baptize Jewish children and then to kidnap said children and raise them as the Christians they became by virtue of being baptized.
-- Teaching that Jews are driven to obtain Christian blood, for a variety of uses inherent to their religion
-- Kings and such rule by divine right, and challenging their rule is equivalent to challenging God.

“If one is truly called to serve God, than one doesn't get hung up on titles or position. Rather, one follows where one is lead (sic).” So Popes, Cardinals, Archbishops, and Bishops can voluntarily relinquish their titles and let women move into their positions, since the titles themselves mean nothing? Oh, one other thought. This sounds an awfully lot like the Protestant viewpoint that each individual is free to establish a personal relationship with God, without having to worry about titles or positions. Have I missed something?

I think Spiderman is paranoid; that is a real problem; what does a blog like this do when bombarded by a stream of sensless, paranoid babbling from people like him? It is a difficult question. Anyone got some suggestions?

Speed123 wrote "I don't know who is more confused and aggressive"

If I or Jacoby were doing this argument against the Catholic Church just 4 centuries ago, both of us would have been burned at the stake for heresy. The difference is not because of doctrinal change but because they lost the power to do so. Speaking of aggressiveness, this church has really not changed but is just forced into submissiveness (not from within but from outside). Untie the knot and see how fierce this leviathan is.

Speaking of confusion, this church is confused and doesn't know where it wants to go -- to side with philosophy of man or stick with the Bible which is the word of God. For centuries , it has been that way -- confused and still confused. Much of their members end up as atheists as a result. If ever they remain devout, they remain as confused devotees.

Roman Catholicism is the official religion of Haiti, but voodoo may be considered the country's national religion. The majority of Haitians believe in and practice at least some aspects of voodoo. Most voodooists believe that their religion can coexist with Catholicism. Most Protestants, however, strongly oppose voodoo.

Adherents of voodoo do not perceive themselves as members of a separate religion; THEY CONSIDER THEMSELVES AS ROMAN CATHOLICS.

Do you wonder why Haiti is in such dire staits now and even before? Stupidity is the cause and their type of religion is the fuel for that STUPIDITY. Catholicism is a CONFUSED religion. It embraces all kinds of stupidity.

Now stop blaming me or others and look towards your practiced false religion. REPAIR IT.

It is so defective. Don't blame the ones who show the defects.

Arminius
Given that you are one of the most gentlemanly of posters, I can't imagine that anyone is deliberately trying to censor you. I'm guessing that the WaPo blog software is acting up. (I would imagine they would censor some of the more insane, vile spew that comes from some of the non-rational types who inhabit this place.

Spiderman2 aka Canyon Shearer, Bible Thumper, Fortune Teller and Severely Brainwashed in that Old Time Religion,

Fools are those who have read only the bible. God cannot be proud of such lazy creations!!!!

What "voodooer of the hoodoo" blessed you with such stupidity in the field of fortune telling and interpretations of said stupidity???

Speed123 wrote "I don't know who is more confused and aggressive"

If I or Jacoby were doing this argument against the Catholic Church just 4 centuries ago, both of us would have been burned at the stake for heresy. The difference is not because of doctrinal change but because they lost the power to do so. Speaking of aggressiveness, this church has really not changed but is just forced into submissiveness (not from within but from outside). Untie the knot and see how fierce this leviathan is.

Speaking of confusion, this church is confused and doesn't know where it wants to go -- to side with philosophy of man or stick with the Bible which is the word of God. For centuries , it has been that way -- confused and still confused. Much of their members end up as atheists as a result. If ever they remain devout, they remain as confused devotees.

Roman Catholicism is the official religion of Haiti, but voodoo may be considered the country's national religion. The majority of Haitians believe in and practice at least some aspects of voodoo. Most voodooists believe that their religion can coexist with Catholicism. Most Protestants, however, strongly oppose voodoo.

Adherents of voodoo do not perceive themselves as members of a separate religion; THEY CONSIDER THEMSELVES AS ROMAN CATHOLICS.

Do you wonder why Haiti is in such dire staits now and even before? Stupidity is the cause and their type of religion is the fuel for that STUPIDITY. Catholicism is a CONFUSED religion. It embraces all kinds of stupidity.

Now stop blaming me or others and look towards your practiced false religion. REPAIR IT.

It is so defective. Don't blame the ones who show the defect.

"Once a Catholic, always a Catholic"

It's difficult to say exactly what the nuns meant by this; never let it be said that old-school nuns ever lacked a healthy imagination when it came to
the supernatural. I think though, that since they also believed that baptism places an indelible mark upon the soul and that someone cannot, therefore, be un-baptized, it's possible they really meant: "once (baptized) a Catholic, always (baptized) a Catholic". Interesting, some people have sought to have their baptismal records expunged in an effort to have their names removed from church rolls.

I agree with others here that the decline in Catholic Church membership is largely due to purely demographic, rather than doctrinal reasons. Catholic families have been birthing fewer Catholics since at least the 50's and rather than debating their members on deep doctrinal issues, most priests seem to spend most of their time just trying to get Catholics to understand the basic tenets of their religion (a job once performed primarily by nuns.)

Spiderman2:

--"Take a lot of picturse to that symbol coz if my interpretations are correct, he may be the last or second to the last pope that we're gonna see. Not quite sure on this yet but there's a big possibility to that. The "Seat of Satan", the Vatican will soon be a thing of the past. Not quite sure yet but 76% sure."

Let me know when you're 82.7387% sure, OK?

Spiderman2, please tell us what are these prophecies that are relevant to us today and have been or will soon be fulfilled. All I have seen so far on this list are retrodictions, ambiguities ("there will be wars"), roulette wheels (where someone spews 1000 prophecies at a wall until one sticks), and self-fulfilling prophecies.

Someone here mentioned the restoration of Israel in 1948 as a prophecy come true. But I already refuted this as a self-fulfilling prophecy because the founding fathers used the Bible as a how-to guide. And don't talk about Isaiah either because I've already refuted that as a retrodiction.

To FORMER CHRISTIAN

Your saying that, "The eye is a perfect example of evolution. Starting with the lowly flatworm whose eye is not very along the evolutionary trail. The flat worm is able to detect and react to light, but can't really see in the same way we can. The flat worm never developed a lense or a pupil, but it can respond to light and presumably that's all it needed to do in order to survive for millions of years."

I would say there is no evidence of evolution here. Why the flat worm did not evolve for million of years? What a flat worm has is what was given to the flat worm by it's creator. Who wants to remain a flat worm for all of this period? Flat worm does not need a complex eye. The designer just gave what a flat worm needs.

You said that, "If you look at the human eye, it's a perfect example of evolution. You would never have designed the eye the way it is because the lense is in the wrong place and the image that comes through the eye is actually upside down and backwards. It required the brain to present the image properly in order for it to work."

My answer to this proposition is that. Why different peoples in this earth did not evolve differently and having a better design of their eyes.

You said, "If an intelligent designer had designed the human eye, he would have to be accused of making extra work -- both for the eye and the brain -- by building this overly complicated structure that still didn't work correctly without adjustments from the brain. Maybe we should sue God for padding his bill."

My aswer to this is that you can go surgeons and ask them to perfect your eye system if you are truthful. This is the best you can achieve. Who was behind this design? A chance and blind evolution. Who put the code in the genes? Try to reflect you will come to the conclusion their is a power behind this design, who we call God.

You said, "There are examples of eyes all along the evolutionary trail and guess what, man's eyes are not neccessarily the best. Fully 90% of people will eventually need eyeglasses. Doesn't that sound like a design flaw by the great creator?"

I would answer this by saying that a good designer doesnot design something to last forever when a lifecyle of an item is only 60-70 years. Anyway any design lasts longer if it is used the way it was intended to be used. If you misuse it you would not blame the designer but blame the user.
Last thing I would like to ask you what is the probability that your eye system or that of human beings or animals would evolve to a better sytem in the coming billion years? Answer this question by using probability and genetics. I want a concrete stuff and not rhetoric.

In defense of the institutional excesses of organized religion, a certain falsehood has been repeated here that the great crimes of the 20th century were commissioned by atheists. This common fiction is provably false. The Nazis and Hitler exalted the Church as fundamental to a Jew-free Germany as codified in the ditty: kinder, kuchen, and [church]. The Soviet Union never lacked for true believers in God or the supernatural. Stalin was notoriously superstitious. Karl Marx, on the other hand, was an atheist and NOWHERE in his writings does he espouse the excesses, much less the crimes, that would doom communism. Marxism, like Catholicism is a theory that has failed only in reality.

Oh there "Reality Challenged" and Obfuscating Jihadist,

Still "obfusing" I see as you still cannot come to grips with the flaws and errors of Islam and the koran, flaws and errors that continue 24/7 to bring terror to the global world.

I don't know who is more confused and aggressive: the extreme disciples of reason (Jacoby) or the extreme "faithful" (spiderman2)...

Nice thing about being Catholic is that you can use both faith AND reason and, therefore, a complete human experience.

In any case, Welcome Benedict!

Hello Spiderman2:)

Having fun alternating as "zookeeper" and as an on the loose "tiger" here?

One is never sure whether to say to you:

"Go tiger, go!" Or, "Take it easy, tiger."

As for your stated intent to preach (as in your post addressed to Athena), George Santayana once defined a fanatic as someone who redoubles his effort once he forgot his purpose.

We are now clear on your purpose here, i.e. to preach, and it must be a new, innovative and cutting edge method of preaching that I am not aware of. But, of course, I am one of the stupid and happily so, adherents of a "false" religion and quite not up to speed on the latest techniques to proselytise or preach on the "truth".

I like it that you quoted from Jose Rizal in one of your posts here. He is the first Asian Catholic liberation theologist and activist in many ways, don't you think? Unless of course, your passions against Catholics and the Catholic Church are very strong, and no good can come out of any Catholics at all.

As for Tolle, all I can say is, I don't quite agree with his statement (as quoted by you in one of your posts here) that man made God in his image. Nor do I think God created man in Its image. That is blasphemous for me to say so by the belief of others, but some of us do have different beliefs on God, and some of us don't believe in God at all.

May God be with you in your mission.

Cheers
"J"

Arminius - please don't get all paranoid. It's just a stupid computer glitch.

They still have a Pope ?

I thought that was just in the Middle Ages, like the Holy Roman Emperor.

Do they still have Vestal Virgins too ?

Problems with explanations of Biblical prophecy to the public at large include, inter alia:

1. Prophecies are for believers only, as revealed by the Holy Spirit. It strenghthens one's faith to watch world events on the evening news and see prophecies unfold as foretold.
2. Only God can reveal the truth to whom he will. It's utter nonsense to everyone else, as God intended, to bar the way to the ungodly.
3. Jesus admonishes us not to cast our pearls before swine.

Nonetheless, here's an obvious one, even to the uninitiated. The most critical key to "end time events" is Israel. It's so critical that in times past some said that Britain was the "new Israel;" others said that America was the "new Israel." Jehovah's Witlesses (est. c. 1840) claim to be the 144,000 of the twelve tribes of Israel. Such claims are the result of there being no Israel on the planet. (Many, many keys to the kingdom are found in Proverbs, which on the surface seem like homilies. The opening lines state specifically why the book was written -- to reveal mysteries.) Israel is the only nation in the world to have ceased to exist for nearly 2,000 years then re-emerge on the world stage precisely in its ancient lands, and whose people speak the ancient language of its patriarchs, re-emerging exactly in the year 1948 as foretold in Genesis.

The Bible is the only unerringly accurate prophetic book in the world, but the prophecies are from the vantage point of Israel. From that perspective, the Bible is Jewish from the first verse of Genesis (which contains prophecies) to the last verse of Revelation (which contains prophecies). Prophecies run throughout the Bible, many specific to certain eras or dispensations of Israel.

Jesus spoke of the end times saying, "The seas roaring and great perplexity and men's hearts failing them for fear of the things coming upon the earth." We shall soon be facing cataclysmic events of Biblical proportion.

The nuclear card hasn't been dealt quite yet. "In the day that the Lord is revealed, the heavens shall depart with a great noise, and the elements, being on fire, shall melt with a fervent heat." [Peter] "The heavens shall roll up like a scroll." [Isaiah] "That day shall burn like and oven." [Micah]

"Let those who have eyes see and ears hear." Those without spiritual discernment are dumb and blind.

We Christians don't need to prove any of this (indeed, it's impossible to do so). As Jesus said, "Watch."

The problem with people like Anonymous is that they drag the name of Chrsit with them but invent their own teachings.

Pretty words but false. Cartoon-like and similar to Disneyland. But when the day is over, it's all but in their own imagination - it never existed.

Fly as Peterpan did. Try if you can.

To former Christian,

thank you for your questions. I don't believe suffering is required for learning. However, it is a result of us being imperfect and perhaps being out of touch with our connection to God.

If we believe that God is infinite (which does not require following any particular religion), then all things are part of God including people, the devil, heaven and hell. If we are not part of God, then God is not infinite as God would end where we begin. The same applies to the concept of heaven and hell.

If we grant this, then heaven, hell and salvation are meaningless concepts because it would be like saying that God needs to be saved or that one part of God (man) is sent to heaven or hell (another part of God) based on his faith in yet another part of God (Jesus). This just doesn't make sense.

The Bible says THAT God created the universe and man but never says why (the old "meaning of life" question). If a being is infinite, then it will express itself in infinite forms (otherwise it limits its infinite potential). Infinite forms means that we have some expressions that seem good and some that seem bad (e.g., suffering). However, to God, this is just part of having infinite consciousness.

We on the other hand, are not fully aware. So we cannot focus on infinity. Hence we have free will to allow us to choose our own expressions. Because of limited awareness we don't see things as part of an infinite body of expression, we see things as they relate to us personally. so if something seems bad to us, we suffer rather than taking it in the context of part of the infinite form of expression of God.

To me, death is actually a merciful act on God's part as it insures that no action we take has permanent negative effects. If we suffer a lifetime, that lifetime is miniscule compared to infinite time. But that experience adds to who we are and what we know.

From that point of view, it doesn't make sense to think of a single life followed by eternal heaven or hell. Why put people through the experience if the only thing that matters is what religion they choose and then eternity of happiness or misery ensues. A loving God would simply put all of the souls in heaven to begin with to avoid the fact that 2/3 of his children will be non-Christians and wind up in hell (if that were really the scenario). And lest a devout Christian reader defend God's allowing so many of his children be damned, I point out that Jesus taught that the lost sheep are valued even more than those not lost. God would not allow so many children to suffer eternally.

To me, the only idea that makes sense is that the soul continues to grow and evolve, expressing itself as God does, until the soul ultimately realizes its oneness with God. If God is loving, then that realization must be the ultimate happiness one could achieve as every loving parent's fondest wish is for his or her children to be happy.

I believe that when religion teaches us that we are not part of God (which is implied is we have sinned against God or we are born into original sin) or deters us from growth (which is implied if we can do nothing to save ourselves and must rely on Jesus to die), then it actually does humanity a grave disservice.

Athena, I don't care if you believe it or not. My purpose is just to preach. Noah didn't get that much convert even if he preached for I think more than a hundred years.

Arminius wrote "Spidey, I walk my own path, and I know that God is with me."

I doubt it coz if that is true , you would love the words of Christ. The reason why Catholicism don't give much credence to the Bible but make their own catechism is because they have no heart for the true Word of God. You can offer me all the treasures in the world but I won't exchange them for the Bible. I love every word of it. They are the embodiment of Christ himself -- so precious like gold (just a comparison but surely much precious than gold).

If you believe in God, it's clear that it's not the God in the Bible.

I see that Venom... err.. Spidey is still failing his course in "How to Make Friends And Influence People." Hey, Venom... telling someone that they're stupid, or that their spiritual leader is stupid, isn't going to attract them to YOUR version of Christianity. I've always felt that spirituality should be based on attraction rather than promotion. If you want people to follow your religion, be the best example of it that you can be. That goes for Catholicism, Fundamentalist Christianity, Wicca, Islam, Judaism, atheism, whatever. Just live it to the best of your ability, and people will want to be like you.

Right now, I don't see that happening.

Arminius wrote "By the way, before you make an association, Spidey and I are very far apart on belief."

I don't invent things and what I say are from the scriptures. If Aminius thinks he is a Christian, that is because the devil also believes in God and many devils think they are "christians". Just look at the pope. He's ignorant of the Word of God but he even considers himself as the representative of Christ. What greater stupidity can top that?

Jimbo,

I am a believer, Christian, progressive, but coming at it from the spiritual side. I am 65. I have no fear of death, that does not drive what I believe. Note that this has nothing to do with what Jesus promised. I came back into Christianity kinda sideways, after 30+ years as a non-believer. I'm still trying to figure it out!

By the way, before you make an association, Spidey and I are very far apart on belief.

Arminius

Jimbo wrote "Its days are numbered"

It depends on whose days. False religions including atheism and evolution or the true church of Christ? As far as I'm concerned, the Creator makes the rules. Who moves out and comes in depends entirely on Him. But common sense dictates that he will weed out those who are not His.

Jimbo wrote "Its days are numbered"

It depends on whose days. False religions including atheism and evolution or the true church of Christ. As far as I'm concerned, the Creator makes the rules. Who moves out and comes in depends entirely on Him. But common sense dictates that he will weed out those who are not His.

Arminius, stupidity has no cure. If you treat light as darkness, that's your call.

Yoyo;

You nailed it good with;

"Spidey's fear dominates his perception. He seems scared enough to believe anything that says he aint gonna die. And in trying to persuade others here, it looks very much like he's really trying desperately to persuade himself".

Its fear that fills the churches, or used to. Without fear of death we wouldn/t need religion. But many of us are seeing this nowand are backing away from religion.

Its days are numbered.

Concerned the Christian Now Liberated,

Not strange at all. Just sometimes returning the favour of so many non-Muslim "experts" and laymen commenting on Islam and Muslims in On Faith, including non-Muslim panelists.

Surely all can stand the views, observations and opinions of one Muslim from the wider world on other faiths or atheism. After all, Muslims are a very small minority in On Faith threads.

I see that you do know how to spell Shiite and Sunni but not Qur'an, which is still spelled as "Koran" by your goodself as one of the "resident experts" on Islam and Muslims, among other faiths you are "expert" of, in On Faith threads.

Offended-Catholic,

Spidey doesn't care who he offends. He seems to have twisted 'What would Jesus do?' into 'Who would Jesus bomb?'.

A-r-m-i-n-i-u-s

offended_Catholic wrote "Please show some respect for who the Catholic Church, and I as a practicing Catholic, considers the Vicar of Christ on earth."

That is exactly the point. The pope is stupid for thinking that he is the Vicar or representative of Christ. For true believers, everyone who is a child of God (born-again) are actually vicars or representative of Christ. If you respect the pope whom you consider vicar and give him a grand and pompous welcome, you should be doing the same for a lot of people here who are truly born again and not just to one person and worse a fake vicar.

If it's fake then he's on the other side. He is a vicar but a Vicar of the devil. I may respect him as a lost person but not as the Vicar of the devil.

My goal is to open the eyes of the blind and not kowtow to the grandiosity of stupidity.

This is A-r-m-i-n-i-u-s again. Looks like I am on WaPo's fecal roster. Damned funny that certain others aren't.

This is A-r-m-i-n-i-u-s testing to see if I am being blocked by my name here

WaPo is blocking posts again.

Spiderman-- that "stupid" person you refer to is Pope Benedict XVI. Please show some respect for who the Catholic Church, and I as a practicing Catholic, considers the Vicar of Christ on earth. Why the venom & contempt for a man of faith who spends his days praying for people like you!?

"And at that time shall Michael stand up, the great prince which standeth for the children of thy people.." (Daniel 12:1)

Do you know that the name Michael is the most common American name today which did not happened during it's earlier years?

Now figure that out what that prophecy means. If you don't understand that, I won't be surprised.

Oh there "Reality Challenged" and Obfuscating Jihadist,

The pope's thinking, text and speeches are a minor issue with respect to the Sunni-Shiite terror gripping the world. Again:

It is very strange that whereas you know and comment so much about the Christian religions and their flaws, the USA and its flaws and the general non-Muslim world and its flaws, you rarely mention the flaws of Islam.

For example, the Sunni and Shiite blood feud for the last 800 years is a flaw terrorizing not only Islam but the world in general. It is obvious that Sunnis (e.g. you) consider Shiites to be a lower class race of hominids who should not be allowed to exist.

From CNN:

"Al-Sistani was apparently referring to Abdullah bin Jabrain, a key member of Saudi Arabia's clerical establishment, who last month joined a chorus of other senior figures from the hardline Wahhabi school of Sunni Islam that regards Shiites as infidels.

Bin Jabrain described Shiites as "the most vicious enemy of Muslims."

Very strong words but you remain silent about such rhetoric??

This Sunni-Shiite blood feud/hatred/genocide/terror continue to spread globally as noted before and below:

Iraq's civil war- Sunni minority, Shiite majority, 24/7 blood letting, 4000 American soldiers dead, 90,000 Iraqi civilians, dead.
Iran, Shiite theocracy, 24/7 support of global terror.

OBL, Sunni/"Wannabee"/Saudi madman and madmen, 24/7 support of global terror.

Fill in the answers below:

Hamas, Sunni or Shiite??

Fatah, Sunni or Shiite??

Pakistan, Sunni or Shiite?

Which group assassinated Bhutto??

Malaysia, nearing a Sunni theocracy?

Bahrain, Sunni or Shiite???

Phillipines, Sunni or Shiite???

Taliban, Sunni or Shiite???

Somalia, Sunni or Shiite???

We await your condemnation of said blood feud and its hate via commentaries on this blog, in your mosque, in your city and country, with your imams/clerics and on every Islamic blog on the internet. Or do you still fear the dictates of the long-dead mad Arab named Mohammed?????

Christie, you're almost there but not quite. Hell is real and Jesus Christ does not lie. The U.S has built this place into a better world because of Self -Defence. If you don't believe in it, you won't be able to practice your faith freely coz by now,if not for the U.S Defense, this world would have been under communism. Common sense is also lacking in most false religions.

The saying, "Once a Catholic, always a Catholic," a favorite maxim of the nuns in the parochial schools, is no longer true.

That makes perfect sense. I was raised as a Catholic. My father was a Navy man for over 40 years. We attended a Catholic church on the base. When we sang hymns about God watching over our men on the sea and in the air, even though I was in elementary school, I understood those men were going to war. And I thought, didn’t Jesus say love your enemies? I didn’t “get it” and I just assumed like math, it would be something I would understand later. It never stopped bugging me. Over the years more and more about the Catholic church would “bug” me. But, I wanted to be “good” like my father and he was Catholic- besides, it was the “oldest Christian religion”.

In 1987, I went to see the pope in Los Angeles. His motorcade was to go down Western Avenue. I arrived early and the streets were lined with kiosks selling pope tea cups, pope tea towels, and pope soap on a rope- I thought of Jesus throwing the money changers out of the temple. The street was strewn with trash and several people were drunk. It was 10 a.m. Finally, the motorcade arrived. The pope passed by, behind the Plexiglas of his pope mobile –doing the queen’s wave. It was over in seconds. As I drove home I said aloud, “God, this cannot be your representative on earth. I just want to live right. Show me how to live right.” The next day, a co-worker asked me about my experience with the pope. Thus began my first satisfying Bible discussion. My co-worker was also a Bible teacher and I began to study with him and his wife.

If you accept the Bible as the inspired word of God, it is difficult to remain Catholic. I was raised Catholic and thought the priests were teaching the Bible. When I finally studied the Bible I could plainly see the Church was teaching the doctrines of men based on human philosophy. (the trinity, hell fire, the immortality of the soul, all good people go to heaven, to name a few) These teachings are in direct opposition to what is stated in the Bible. Thus, the Church drew people away from God instead of helping people to develop a personal relationship with God. How personal a relationship can you have with someone when you don’t know or use their name? God has a personal name and the Church doesn’t teach it.
(Psalm 83:18)
18 That people may know that you, whose name is Jehovah,
You alone are the Most High over all the earth.

When I read 1Timothy 4:1-3, I asked my priest at that time to explain it to me.
(1 Timothy 4:1-3)1 However, the inspired utterance says definitely that in later periods of time some will fall away from the faith, paying attention to misleading inspired utterances and teachings of demons, 2 by the hypocrisy of men who speak lies, marked in their conscience as with a branding iron; 3 forbidding to marry, commanding to abstain from foods which God created to be partaken of with thanksgiving by those who have faith and accurately know the truth.

The priest’s response, “Oh, we don’t use that book so much.”
That was enough for me, I switched to a religion that respects the Bible as God’s Word, and has real love among themselves. (John 13:34,35)

They are not taught to think that they are better than people of other races or skin color. Neither are they taught to hate people from other countries.
(Acts 10:34, 35)

They do not share in wars. They treat one another as brothers and sister. (1 John 4:20,21)

As Jesus' disciples, they are no part of this wicked world. (John 17:16)

They do not get involved in the world's political affairs and social controversies.

They look to God’s Kingdom as the only lasting solution to all mankind’s problems.

One clear manifestation that a religion is false is when it gives too much reverance to a "top man" in their religion. For Catholicism, the pope; For Mormons, Joseph Smith or their curent leader; For Anglicans, the queen or the Archbishop.

True believers has no "top man" except the Lord Himself, Jesus Christ. No stupid person in between.

Take a lot of picturse to that symbol coz if my interpretations are correct, he may be the last or second to the last pope that we're gonna see. Not quite sure on this yet but there's a big possibility to that. The "Seat of Satan", the Vatican will soon be a thing of the past. Not quite sure yet but 76% sure.

1 billion of ignorance and stupidity and admiration to the symbol of such which is the pope.

Oh please - surely you must know that if the media didn't think Benedict's visit to the US was a big deal, they wouldn't bother to cover one second of it.
Recall John Paul II's funeral and the election of Benedict? The most watched event in the history of media. And Benedict's visit to the US will be the same.
1 BILLION Catholics worldwide will be transfixed on the United States this week, on the man who is not only a spiritual leader, but a WORLD leader.
Two of the most important cities in the world are halting business at hand to host this great man. And the media will cover it non-stop, because it is of interest to many, many people, not just Catholics. No, the media won't spin the positive....it IS positive.

Mary Cunningham,

Hello. Good to see you.

Yes, not only am I a Protestant kind of Muslim, i.e. a Sunni, but to go by comparative Christian denominations, I'd be a Quaker. The Wahhabis are like the rabid Christian evangelicals/inerrantists.

The Shiites are the closest Muslim equivalents to Catholics in term of the ulema having more clearly defined hierarchies, thought their theology is certainly more sublime on the spiritual that those by the Sunni ulema.

If I had not love fashions, including traditional costumes of people around the world, I would not be noticing religious vestments worn by members of the clergy of any faith. The ones worn by Catholic clergy are the best and most luxuriant.

It is interesting that in the Catholic Church, the clergy dress up for God as a expression of and for the glory of God, but for the Muslim ulema, to dress down and modestly to show humility before God.

You do notice in London how dull the long gowns/robes and turbans/hats worn by Muslim imams are. Grand Muftis of Muslim states don't look so grand in their dull coloured and too simple designed black or grey long robes. I'm dying to ask them what they wear underneath - pants or petticoats?

Even though I am not quite as fond of Pope Benedict 16 as I was of Pope John Paul II due to what the former said before about other faiths, including Judaism, Buddhism and other Christian denominations, I am getting a bit uncomfortable reading some of the quite nasty posts here on the Pope/ Catholic Church/Vatican. It is getting to be right up there with what some people commented on Jerry Falwell when he died, and Mother Teresa on her personal doubts. Not that I am that fond of Jerry Falwell.

I just hope Pope Benedict 16 receive gracious hospitality from his hosts, the American government and people when he visits the US. He is, after, all, a guest of the country and should be received, treated and protected as such when there. I have no doubt the Pope would be accorded guest treatment if he visits any Muslim country regardless of what some of us think of his previous remarks on other faiths, including on Islam and Muslims. Well, that is the Asian/Muslim in me coming out on receiving and treating guests in our homes and countries.

Thanks and best regards
"J"

Chris,

Many atheists are rightly hostile toward religion because of the fact that many religionists are constantly trying to impose (using the power of the government) their religious (and therefore irrational) opinions on everybody else, despite the clear prohibitions enumerated in the Constitution.

My guess is when religionists stop trying to use government authority to impose their religious opinions on others, atheists will quit calling them on it.

That seems fair to me ... but then again, I don't have a divinely inspired moral code either.

Age old arguments, nothing really changes, we still see the desire for both camps to convince the other. The fact is that the convincing needs to be done to ones self only. I find that people who have found the path do not find it necessary to try to replicate the same for others and this goes for both belivers and non-believers.
In regards to the argument who created god! well if it was so simple to answer that then it would not have the status of a god, question for the non-belivers though maybe you should first answer the question who created the "perfect system" that we live in. Any wrongs are all attributable to mankind directly not the "loving caring" god.

This author has, in effect, replaced her religion with atheism, in effect making it a moral code that has no divine basis. Atheists who spend a great deal of their time writing, teaching, and otherwise opining on religion could also be held in general suspicion: why are they so preoccupied with over-explaining and qualifying their positions on religion? Was there a negative experience in their past they were unable to reconcile with their inheirted faith? Perhaps. A genuine atheist, in my opinion, doesn't feel the need to be consistently hostile or defensive toward religious ideals because he undertands the difference between the Constitutional protections for free religious practice in American society and the Constitutional protections against state-sponsored persecution. Are we to infer from Ms. Jacoby that there is no absolute truth but the lack of it? That requires a leap of faith infinitely greater than any belief in God.

Tim Conway,

I really enjoyed your work in "The Apple Dumpling Gang".

John D and Ellen:

You imply a bitterness in the article that simply was not there.

As a raised-catholic-turned Athiest, I echo the comments of the author. I personally have very warm feelings toward the church, and still attend on occasion when a certain priest I admire takes the pulpit.

You seem to engage the falacy that all people who leave the church leave because they don't like the church. To the contrary, even good congregations that engage in good deeds can produce non-believers who simply realize that there is no evidence for the church's supernatural claims.

My warm feelings toward the church however do not mean that I would defend those actions of the church I believe are wrong, or support the baseless claims Ellen makes about some kind of super-natural after life or any perceived benefit to fits of prayer.

Few athiests I've ever met are bitter. Many who include themselves in the camp described as faith, on the other hand, have no shortage of vitriol.

I'm with e favorite -- Anonymous was the one who stated someone had to write the rules. Okay, so where is the evidence of the author of those rules? Shouldn't there be something that points to the creator of those rules other than I think God did it?

It just seems so easy for religious people to say well, we don't know how this started so it must be God. But 2,000 years ago, when a family came down with a disease and died, we concluded that the family must have done something to offend God.

Now, since our science allows us to understand that AIDS is caused by a virus and lighting is caused by static electricity, religions have run out of things they can attribute to God. (Except for Pat Robertson who is sure that Hurricane Katrina was caused by American acceptance of homosexuals). And therefore, we are left with original sin. Because some symbolic man and female, who were never taught right from wrong, made a decision from that point on, every man and woman that ever lived is destined to be sinners.

Now how plausable is that? Also, what does that say about a loving, perfect God -- couldn't he foresee the decision? Oh, no matter, God will fix his error in mankind version 2.0 using Noah as the template.

Oh, that didn't work out so well either. God, who you say is not limited by earthly rules or even the rules of the universe, couldn't figure out who was bad and who was good so he had to kill everyone. Even Santa knows who was naughty and who was nice.

Have you noticed that God has a tendency to practice widespread genocide? Look at the first born of Egypt in Exodus. Or look at the great flood. He's almost like that wizard in the All Tell cell phone commercials who accidentally kills some -- "oops....my bad".

E Favorite asks:

"Plus what is a 'spiritual nature?'"

I believe that would be "existential angst," in modern terminology.

Or perhaps it has something to do with sex. Most things do, when you boil them down to their essence, as Prof. Freud discovered. I think an extraterrestrial would agree with me that most human novels and movies are about sex.

E-Fav and Anonymous,

Scientific laws are written by scientists, of course!

Naturally occurring phenomena are observed by scientists who then write testable laws to describe the phenomena they observe.

'On Faith?' Is there ever, anywhere, truth in itself? Is there a difference between truth and 'absolute' truth? Isn't it a belief to state there is nothing which is true always and everywhere, therefore no absolute truth? Certainly there can be no proof of such a proposition. And isn't belief after all, irrational? And yet you believe there is no absolute truth, and that it can be known through Faith. This places you in the position of taking a position on faith - so welcome to the club. DeCarte was only speculating, after all, else nothing would be knowable. Here is what the Pope knows: there are some things which are eternally, completely true, that lie within human experience. One of them is that God's judgement will come upon Bernard Law, and our desire for vengeance may not be satisfied where he is concerned. Yet we have other business to attend. Shalom!

spiderman2 wrote:

"Nothing can create something more intelligent than itself and that's a fact."

No, it is wishful thinking on your part, and ignorance. You assert that over and over again, but repetition does not make an assertion true, and physical evidence proves that this one is false.

"DNA does not allow one specie to become another specie. It's out of its range."

This is meaningless nonsense.

"That AIDS virus or any mutating bacteria would never become a tiger if you observe it day and night for a trillion years."

Nothing in the universe will ever again evolve into a tiger, but bacteria in an empty world will evolve into millions of new species in far less time than a trillion years.

I realize that you will never accept this, or even try to learn what it means. Others reading this forum may find my response useful or amusing.

Anyway, I thank you for performing a public service. You give religion a bad name. You demonstrate why extreme religious beliefs coupled with closed-minded obstinate ignorance really are a threat to society. When atheists say this, people tend to pooh-pooh them, or say they are being alarmist. When you come on line and post this sort of thing, you make our case for us in a more convincing fashion than we ever could.

I do not think that moderate religious beliefs are a threat to society or anything else. At worst, they are a minor, harmless eccentricity. Dawkins is wrong about that issue, and Jacoby is right.

Benedicta, you say “By denying and suppressing your spiritual nature, you live only half the life you were meant to live.”

No kidding? Did you learn that in the Catholic Church? I never heard that before, but you say it with such certainty, that it sounds official.

Sorry, I don’t buy it. Plus what is a “spiritual nature?” Does it have to mean an invisible, supernatural being for which there is no evidence? Or can it be a good feeling that seems to come out of nowhere?

Anonymous says: “There are laws that govern the physical world, who wrote them?”

I don’t know who or what wrote them or if anything did. Maybe someday, scientists will figure it out, the way they’ve figured out so many things that we once thought were divine intervention (e.g. thunder and lightning).

But it sounds like you think you do know --– God did it, right? How do you know that?

I read Ms Jacoby because I am Catholic and want to see the true anti-Catholic bias that is out there. I am curious. I can get it from fools (like many on this and other blogs), but I would assume this forum has some credibility. I am wrong.

Her most recent diatribe was one of the more biased and bashing I have read. It was so foaming at the mouth that it was almost unintelligible in places. And she continues to censor the other posts. I know this because she makes reference to a post that has not shown up in the list of posts (I have read them all in the time frame she notes out of curiosity of what she refers to). She saw the post that was censored, but no one else did. Ergo, she obviously is in on the censorship. Talking about protesting too much. The game is up Jacoby.

For all those interested in a good dialog on Catholicism or other religions, go read a good book or get on another website. This forum is a one way circus.

Does anyone else also find it utterly offensive that Jacoby tells you what the "truths" of her censorship are. This is hate speech, this is not. The utter arrogance of the diatribe is so telling.

What is the expertise of an atheist? Nothingness. Why is this lady even in this forum. Everyone quit wasting your time. I am probably wasting mine because this will be censored.

And

Being surrounded by others who share one's belief, powerfully reinforces that belief. It can make one absolutely certain that there REALLY IS a Vishnu, or an Apollo, or an Allah, or a Satan or whatever it is that the rest of one's group believes.
There are few doubters amongst the religious. Doubt is seen as weak and waffling, and is strongly discouraged; for the obvious reason that doubt is corrosive and will destroy the religion, which is held together by faith and not much else.

In the past, doubters were burned or drowned, or tortured to repent . Now that the Church has lost the power to kill nonbelievers and doubters, we can finally speak up; because a secular world allows us the freedoms that religions always deny us. Especially the freedom to think for ourselves, rather than being told what to think.

It is wonderful that the world is getting more secular all the time. It gives me hope for the future.

Former Christian:
"Okay anonymous, so then who wrote the rules under which God came into being? Oh, the age old first cause argument -- everything has a first cause except of course God.

Why is it that God always existed and the universe couldn't? "

So who wrote the rules under which God came into being? What came first, the chicken or the egg? A cirlce has no beggining or end. To put limits on a force, divine being, energy, call it what you want, that can define and estabilish the laws of the physcial world is intellecually arrogant.

Former Christian:
"Okay anonymous, so then who wrote the rules under which God came into being? Oh, the age old first cause argument -- everything has a first cause except of course God.

Why is it that God always existed and the universe couldn't? "

So who wrote the rules under which God came into being? What came first, the chicken or the egg? A cirlce has no beggining or end. To put limits on a force, divine being, energy, call it what you want, that can define the physcial world is intellecually arrogant.

Addendum:

No characteristic of religion makes it necessarily dogmatic or, let us say, more dogmatic than other collectively accepted beliefs. However, we have little or no experience with organized religions that are not total dogma. This even in the face of the syncretic collapse of all dogmatic systems ever experienced in recorded human history.

Former Christian:
"Okay anonymous, so then who wrote the rules under which God came into being? Oh, the age old first cause argument -- everything has a first cause except of course God.

Why is it that God always existed and the universe couldn't? "

So who wrote the rules under which God came into being? What came first, the chicken or the egg? A cirlce has no beggining or end. To put limits on a force, divine being, energy, call it what you want, that can define the world is intellecually arrogant.

TEST TEST continues . . .

[Not an important posting. Just trying to see what causes messages to be rejected . . . This section mentions sex. Maybe that stops it from being posted?]

I think it is presumptuous of you to assert that we all secretly share your spiritual yearnings or your desire to believe in God. This reminds me of the formerly widespread, weird heterosexual view that homosexuals are only kidding themselves (or kidding us), and if you expose them to heterosexual eroticism they will wake up and realize they are "normal." It also reminds of some old people in Japan I met who sincerely thought that everyone actually speaks Japanese, because everyone does on television. Of course they knew that I and others speak different languages, but they had a sense we were faking it. They asked me: "Why go to all that trouble to speak English, when Japanese is so much easier and more natural."

I think you should realize that people really do know their own minds, and they mean what they say. You may feel atheists are misguided, but you should not imagine they are insincere or blind to their own feelings. . . .

I have seen this sort of argument in other venues, especially politics. Republicans (and Democrats) think the other side secretly agrees and is being insincere. This is part of a new-age attitude in which we assume there are no genuine difference of opinion, only misunderstandings; and we try to psychoanalyze the person we are debating with instead of addressing the content of his or her argument.

test

TEST TEST

This WaPo server is weird. It has accepted some messages from me and rejected one other. It says the message has been delivered to the "blog owner" for review.

Let me post part of the rejected message, as a test.

Many people here have claimed there is censorship, but this looks like a computer glitch to me, because there is nothing in my message rejected that any human would censor.

Benedicta speculates about atheists:

"Being an atheist may be 'rational,' but reason is only one facet of what it means to be human. By denying and suppressing your spiritual nature, you live only half the life you were meant to live."

I do not think I have any spiritual nature to suppress, and I am certainly not actively suppressing any aspect of my nature. Perhaps I am not sufficiently self-aware . . .

"We all have spiritual hunger, and it needs to be fed by something deeper and greater than the boundaries of our finite minds."

How can you be sure we "all" have this hunger? You cannot read my mind . . . People are very different from one another, even at the level of basic instincts. . . .

I think it is presumptuous of you to assert that we all secretly share your spiritual yearnings or your desire to believe in God. . . .

In the world today dogmatism of any kind is being recognized and questioned from many directions, among them: government, morality, science, philosophy, religion, sociology, psychology, etc. However, more than half of the worlds population, some of them very powerful, are avid and even militant subscribers to dogma. Much conflict today may be related to the entrenched defense of dogma and the determination for it to be retained at any cost. Surely the Catholic Church would be adversely affected by movement in the population away from organized religion toward its having no other purpose than entertainment.

Anonymous wrote:

For all you aethists, a pretty simple explanation for the existance of God from a scientific point of view: "If mathematics is the language of the universe, than physics is the poetry." Someone had to write the language, someone had to write the poetry. Someone or something had to write the rules that causes an apple to fall from a tree, a planet to orbit a star, or water to create life. There are laws that govern the physical world, who wrote them?

Okay anonymous, so then who wrote the rules under which God came into being? Oh, the age old first cause argument -- everything has a first cause except of course God.

Why is it that God always existed and the universe couldn't?

I was raised a catholic. Didn't have any choice in the matter. Still carry a lot of baggage from it too. But I'm not a died in the wool, slavering fanatical fundamentalist, nor am I an atheist.

Now it's a fact of logic that it is impossible to prove something doesn't exist. It may not exist, but you can't prove it. I'm willing to admit that God, Allah, Yahweh, Mother Earth, the spirits of our ancestors, or some other manifestation of the Ultimate Power exists; in fact, I have a mental dependence on it, him, her, whatever.

I've sampled all kinds of religions and NONE of them have the absolute truth. As they don't have the absolute truth, then they don't have any ethical, legal, or moral basis to impose their beliefs on me. And I'll return the favor.

Not saying that a lot of religious groups don't do a lot of good for people. What was it that Jesus said? "If you do good for reason, then you do good in God's eyes. If you do bad in God's name, then you're not doing God's will", or something to that effect.

Nuff said.

Ms. Jacoby, for better or for worse America has always been something of a cultural and religious smörgåsbord. For my money that is a good thing.

Whether anyone likes it or not this country over its history has incorporated into its national character cultures from all over the world and will almost certainly continue to do so no matter what else happens. The fact of the matter is that here we are free to find our own version of absolute truth and that means top down answers to the question such as the Roman Catholic Church are going to be in deep trouble if as you pointed out they either can't or won't keep their own houses clean.

Strangely enough the Roman Catholic Church begin to collapse with Vatican II. Not because what Vatican II did wasn't something that should have been done a century or more sooner, but rather because the result of Vatican II, which many of it's architects thought would actually strengthen the Roman Catholic Church, in fact, established in the minds of many laymen the fact that the church had been wrong for at least a millennium on issues over which it had cheerfully shed the blood of thousands and if it could be wrong about that then what else might it also be wrong about?

The Roman Catholic Church much like the former Soviet Union chose to commit suicide. Both did so without realizing at the moment that the changes they were making would be their death knell. The Soviet Union went down more quickly simply because no one ever thought that it held any kind of morale high ground to begin with (if you don't accept the notion of common every day morality it's quite difficult to claim superiority based upon it) Catholicism as we know will take some time longer to die and I suspect rather than die it will metamorphose into something else exactly what I don't know. There are simply too many possibilities with too many variables, permutations and combinations.

For all you aethists, a pretty simple explanation for the existance of God from a scientific point of view: "If mathematics is the language of the universe, than physics is the poetry." Someone had to write the language, someone had to write the poetry. Someone or something had to write the rules that causes an apple to fall from a tree, a planet to orbit a star, or water to create life. There are laws that govern the physical world, who wrote them?

Curious wrote (regarding $.25 condoms)
You must not have priced condoms lately. Or, perhaps you have a wholesale supplier?

I'm afraid you are right. It's been 13 years since I've had the need. I had a meeting with the good doctor who introduced me to the benefits of a "V" operation.

Yo Speed
Are you able to make a post without a personal attack? One might suspect you are an anti-Catholic posing here to give real Catholics a bad name. Your own actions demonstrate the lack of any "transformative" influences of faith. Your personal attacks demonstrate the emptiness of your arguments, and probably the emptiness of your "faith".
If Christianity is so good for you, perhaps you ought to spend some time practicing it - as it stands you seem a rather bitter and frustrated person who evokes more pity than thought.

Neal G. Dunkleberg:

I disagree about your inclusion of the Right to Life movement in your fundamentalist list.

In 1860 you could have added Abolitionist to your list of 'fundamentalists' who try to impose their will on others. We fought a war over that. Were they wrong? Should we not have imposed Northern views on the South?

Bravo! Ms. Jacoby has hit the nail right on the head! Let's remember that Benedict XVI when he was merely Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger was instrumental in driving the most famous Catholic theologian,Hans Kung,out of his academic position due to his too liberal theology. Dissent was not welcomed by Cardinal Ratzinger in the 1980's. I doubt it would be tolerated now.

To Bendicta:
You say Hitler was an atheist. He was not, he was a Christian and admired the Catholic Church. I have see photos taken during WWII that show Bishops with their hands raised in the Hitler salute. Also, the Catholic Church excommunicated those who would not join the Nazi party. My source is "The Nightmare Years" written by William Shirer who lived in Germany during Hitler's rise to power. He spoke German so he was not getting things 2nd hand.

American Catholics might be disappearing. But then again so is American influence and power.

Not that the two are necessarily related. Be it the flight of the Catholics or the rise of the Atheists, the US is moving towards becoming the international wall flower.

Former Christian wrote:
“Of course that doesn't say much for the creator of the universe if his will can be thwarted by a $.25 condom.”
April 14, 2008 12:22 AM
-------------------------------------------------------------------
You must not have priced condoms lately. Or, perhaps you have a wholesale supplier?

Spiderman- several comments are directed towards you; I'll add a short one: The Catholic faith doesn't believe that only what's written in the Bible is true. The church believes that faith was also handed down through Oral Tradition. I realize this is only a suggestion, and I don't know you personally, but some beliefs are not as stupid as you presume them to be.

Generally, it is sad that Catholics out there don't know their faith. I'm a proud Catholic, and my faith has changed my life. I mean, in Adoration, I can actually kneel before Jesus Christ in the Blessed Sacrament. He's actually there, in the room-- even though He looks like a piece of bread. It's His Body (not just a "presence"). He's really there! That's the Catholic faith. Seriously--- the Eucharist is Jesus' Body!! (John 6). Okay, well I believe it 100%. That is the Catholic faith.

So Catholics out there, get with the program. Start praying! Just because you label yourself "Catholic" doesn't make you (or I) one. God's ways are so above our ways... Let's not play a silly game. Let's live our faith already!

4 days until Pope Benedict XVI is in D.C. yayy!!

I was raised and still consider myself a Catholic. However, I find myself in a position similar to your own, only I do not find myself to be as intellectually arrogant. I am in my young-twenties, fresh out of college, so to say I am living a true Catholic life would be a blatant lie, mainly because being a Catholic is very difficult, especially in today's society. This contributes to the ever increasing amount of Protestant churches that pop up in the United States (how about the one that pickets the funerals of American soldiers). People didnt like the rules of the Catholic church, so they made a church with their own rules to justify their behavior. Now as a previously stated in no way am I perfect, however I would rather admit to being wrong and work to improve myself than simply change the beliefs I grew up on, and yes at times still doubt, to justify behavior I know is wrong.

Many of the problems that people have with Catholic are their views on sex. First and foremost, sex was designed to create life. The pleasures of sex were designed to intice us to have sex. If it didnt feel good, I doubt anyone would walk around with reproduction at the top of their list for things to do today. I believe shortly after the Second Vatican Council the Pope issued a statement about contraceptives and how they will affect society. He predicted the increase of disease, abortion, unwanted pregnancy, and the collapse of the family. With the amount of STD's, teen pregancy, abortions, and the fact that almost every knows that over 50% of marriages end in divorce...WAS HE WRONG?

To John Hodge:

Thanks for the prayers. Show me one indisputable example of prayers working. I can show you 5 quotes from Jesus where he says that you can do literally anything with just a small amount of faith, through prayer. You know, move mountains to the sea and all that.

I've seen nothing that can be attributed to only God. God doesn't seem to be able to rebuild amputated limbs. He doesn't seem to be able to communicate his will to all people so that they everyone has a common understanding. In fact, Christians can't even agree on what God thinks is important. So I find it hard to believe that there's anybody up there.

Jimbo56 wrote:

"How does an Athiest respond to death? 'Well, we live we die, we come we go?' Is it rather ambivalent? I can't imagine you'd be all that much comfort at a wake."

There is nothing ambivalent about it. It does not embrace opposites and it is not uncertain. Perhaps you have some other word in mind.

It may not be comforting at a wake, but that has no bearing on whether it is true or not. That is a logical fallacy: Appeal to Emotion. It is also an Appeal to the Consequences of a Belief, and Wishful Thinking.

Also, the fact that death is the complete end of existence does not bother me at a wake or anywhere else.

Fundamentalist religious practice - Islam, Christian, Hindu, Jewish or whatever - is intrinsically immoral.

Fundamentalists insist they KNOW things that are actually beliefs - not knowledge. This state inevitably leads to violation of a most fundamental moral principle, to wit: IT IS IMMORAL TO FORCE YOUR BELIEFS ON OTHERS! The Holy Inquisition, the Taliban and the Right-to-Life movement exemplify the nasty habit.

The basis for continuation of this endless immorality is an educational system that fails to teach our children to discern belief from knowledge. Perhaps someday . . .

A Reminder: "The fact that our lives are measured in hours sets a limit on what we can know. Truth comes from no transcendental reason beyond the human ken; all we can know is that opinions vary and that what one man may die for,another will scoff as absurd. In this way, each man becomes the measure of all things, but we cannot reach a coherent transpersonal body of knowledge." (Protagoras)

Most "non-practicing" Catholics have rejected the faith because one or more of the "rules" don't fit their lifestyle. It seems as though you have rejected all tenets of all religion and even the existence of a higher power. I will seiously pray for you to seriously reconsider your position and understand why we are on this planet.

God Bless You.

To A different point of view,

Some very interesting posts -- well thought out and supported. Here are some questions:

First, you said: I never said that suffering is proof that God does not exist. In fact, the two are quite reconcilable. God allows suffering because we have free will. to take away our suffering would be to not allow us the opportunity to grow and overcome the situation that caused the suffering. that would just make us pampered children.

Why is suffering required for free will? Are you really putting limitations on God? In other words, aren't you saying without suffering there could be no free will. Couldn't the creator of the universe have built a world in which their is both free will and no suffering?

There are many people of faith who ascribe to the understanding that since God is so much more than the universe we cannot expect to be able to measure his impact or even to detect his presence.

And yet, the argument that without suffering there would be no free will attempts to limit God to our understanding of the universe. Through suffering we learn compassion.

Couldn't there be other ways of learning compassion?

I'd be interested in your understanding of heaven. The typical Christian viewpoint is that it's a place without suffering and yet people still have free will. The natural question asked of the creator should be why all the suffering if there's none of that garbage in heaven?

Another area of question has to do with the death of Jesus. So how exactly does his death reconcile us from God? I may be mixing up the various posts I've been reading, but I just don't get the whole sacrifice thing.

Christians in general are critical of those religions that practiced sacrifice. Imagine, our city is protected because we sacrificed children or a virgin to the God of whatever. We think that's silly yet we are perfectly capable of believing that the sacrifice of a man somehow erases our sins. What's the difference between what the Aztecs did or what the ancient Hebrews did and the resurrection story?

Benedict should address the crises in the Catholic Church before giving sermons to the world community.

The Crises in the contemporary Catholic Church:

1. The inappropriate conduct of many priests, the emotional stress on the victims and the resultant billion dollars in lawsuits.

2. The lack of talent in the priesthood.

3. The lack of Vatican response to the historic Jesus movement.

4. The Church's continuing cling to original sin and the resulting subsets of crazy ideas like limbo.

5. The denial of priesthood to women.

6. The restriction of priesthood to single men (unless you are former Episcopalian priests),

7. And the continued chain of Vatican "leadership" by old European white men.

I would be curious to hear a devout Catholics view on the Pope's infallibility on church matters.
Specifically.......

1. why the sabbath was moved from saturday to sunday? [remember the sabbath to keep it holy]

2. why was the pope so silent during the second world war? there is not a single noteworthy speech where he says that Hitler is evil and the nazi regime must be stopped. [not to mention those forced into servitude by the church]

3. under what principle of catholicism is not revealing child molesters from their positions, but moving them to another parish?

4. the crusades.......killing anyone that doesn't subscribe to your beliefs, is based on what Christian principle.

5. jews were persecuted for hundreds of years for what reason, other than disagreeing with your doctrine?

6. does belief in a different doctrine open up non-catholics to threats of torture, punishment, and death? if not, why has it in the past?

and last, but certianly not the last question I can come up with.......

7. when the Catholic church was the great power in the world in Europe, we now cqll those times the Dark Ages. any comment?

Susan Jacoby alerts us to the fact that the Supreme Court is disproportionately stacked with extremely conservative catholics (Roberts, Alito, Thomas, and the most conservative of all - Scalia). Watch out America - religious zealots wearing black robes are infusing their judicial decisions with their narrow, incorrect, and bigoted interpretation of the bible. Hal Itozis

To Jimbo56:

you are attacking a straw man. Yes, suffering is part of the human condition. My point was that Jesus taught us that faith heals us and the pope was not healed. You failed to explain why other that to proffer "healed" equals acceptance, which I believe is different than what the Bible says when it reports that crippled people got up and walked. so you still have not explained why Pope John Paul II was not healed.

I never said that suffering is proof that God does not exist. In fact, the two are quite reconcilable. God allows suffering because we have free will. to take away our suffering would be to not allow us the opportunity to grow and overcome the situation that caused the suffering. that would just make us pampered children.

For that reason, I do not believe we can be saved by Jesus. That would take away any responsibility on our part to grow as people. all we would need to do under the Christian point of view is "accept" our sins and allow Jesus to pay for them with his death. How do we grow from that paradigm?

Rather, when we take action, we see the consequences of our actions. This helps us to grow. If we start wars, suffering and death happen. To overcome that suffering we need to learn love and peace. that teaches us something and that's why God doesn't intervene and stop our wars; if he did, we'd still hate.

this is also the best explanation I have for my other question, which is "Why the apple?". In order to have free will, we must understand the consequences of our actions. This means we need a way to evaluate the good and the bad. without that ability, our free will teaches us nothing. So the apple is actually a necessary ingredient for our free will as it gave us the ability to see good and evil. That explains why God (metaphorically) gave us the apple. In that light, the apple is a good thing and we are not damned for having eaten it. It also means that we don't need to be saved, just that we need to grow. This places salvation on us, where it should be, and not on Jesus, which would teach us nothing. All loving parents want their children to grow and be independent. That cannot happen, unless they assume responsibility for their own lives and learn right from wrong. By teaching us the apple was bad and that we're sinners needing to be saved, the Bible obscures that lesson from us.

I have some comments.
Was it ever true that "Once a Catholic, always a Catholic? If one is arguing that the American Catholic Church is quickly disappering, then, yes, I suppose the most significant fact in the Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life that 24% of Americans consider themselves Catholic. But, it's only significant to you.

Would it be safe to say that enrollment in Catholic grammar and high schools have declined because the baby boomer generation peaked years ago?

What is "dire" about the American Catholic Church that immigration will change? Dire in what sense?

"cafeteria Catholics" and "the Catholic right" ...is it all about sex with them? You've lumped decades of change that took place in the Church and disconnected results and causes, taken events out of context and have made sloppy observations. In your striving for a rational world, holding your banner high, a few of these remarks are just plain, common, ignorant insults.

You may have been raised in a Cathlic family. You say you are an atheist; as an adult, you've come to make that decision. But, it doesn't necessarily follow that you disowned being Catholic. The reality is that you never were Catholic.

This "Journalist/Commentator" business... this is just sloppy thinking put to pen. What's the purpose?

"As an atheist, I do not, of course, share this nostalgia. Claims to the possession of absolute truth are dangerous--to individual minds, societies, and the entire world."

I totally agree on the claims on absolute truth as being dangerous, but then, call yourself an agnostic. Atheisms has its claim to possession of absolute truth...as there is no God or a cosmic flying spaghetti monster or Ba'al or whatever. I'd say that is as inflexible & dangerous as any fundamentalist religion.

Former Christian/A different point of view-

You've highlighted my point. Your argument would be,"We have AIDs which is terrible,people suffer, so therefore, there is no God."

Again, suffering is a part of the human experience. It always has been. However, through suffering, we learn to be compassionate and giving. We learn to perfect our humanness (hopefully) which puts our souls in a state closer to God. If one tries, we can see the presense of God in almost everything.

This is the problem with many in our society. Like St. Thomas, we need to "see" in order to believe. We've never witnessed a miracle (that we're aware of) so there must not be a God. Now, I would contend that small miracles happen around us all the time, but we chalk it up to coincidence or fate or luck. Maybe all. But we don't see God.

On the flip side, we look at pain, suffering and evil, and for some it's proof positive that there isn't a God. It's an interesting position to take.

God never promises that our life on Earth would be easy or free from pain. In the beatitude's, Jesus spoke specifically about this.

To me there is too much evidence to not believe in some higher power, a God.

How does an Athiest respond to death? "Well, we live we die, we come we go?" Is it rather ambivelant? I can't imagine you'd be all that much comfort at a wake.

On the other side. I take offense to some of the postings.

Don't try and drive a wedge between different points of views among Christians. If Spiderman needs to believe in an absolute interpretation of the Bible to help his/her faith journey, that's his perogative.

The Catholic Church has had positive impacts on Western Civilization - social unity, great art, etc. - and continues to do good through charities, but I wouldn't be saddened by its passing. The claim to absolute truth is a dangerous invitation to all kinds of extremism, and this has been adequately demonstrated by the Catholic Church several times in its history. Time to evolve past religion.

to Jimbo56:

You say that healing may be an acceptance of the condition not a cure. But this is not what is written in the Bible. Lepers were cleansed, the blind saw, cripples could walk. This cannot be interpreted as a continued affliction with the acceptance of the sick. Acceptance of one's crippled condition is not the same as walking.

You also point out that the Bible may not be as written. This is an excellent point. In fact, the Jews who wrote the Old Testament do not consider it to be the word of God but only an expression of their history and lore.

so if the Bible is not literally the word of God and is not literally as written, who has the authority to say what is true and what is not? One what basis would someone make such a factual assertion? Perhaps then religion should be recast as a theory of how we came to be and a set of recommendations on morality that we can judge for ourselves. But the minute you open the door to say that the Bible is literally not true, then religion as it is viewed now falls apart. After all, without the apple being literally true, we are not born into original sin and we have no need for Jesus' salvation. As a lifelong Catholic, are you prepared to make that leap? If not, then on what basis do you believe in original sin and the need to be saved by Jesus' death?

To Spiderman: Don't you think you should be able to answer, "Why the apple?" if you are going to believe it? If your beliefs don't make sense, then aren't they really superstition?

As for your comment that those who did not hear the gospel will be judged by their conscience and those who did will be judged by their beliefs. It would seem that given that billions of people hear and do not belief, the greatest favor God could give is to make sure those non-believers never hear. But assume your argument (or the Bible's) is true. why should non-believers be tortured eternally for believing a different religion? The premise of Christianity is that we are born into original sin and that Jesus had to die to save us. But again, why punish us for what Adam and Eve did? Where is our sin? And why should it matter whether we believe in Jesus? If he died for our sins, why isn't that enough? we receive the sun's warmth whether or not we believe that God created the sun. So why can't we be saved whether or not we believe that we are? After all, other religions such as Judaism, the Muslim religion and Buddhism teach repenting sin and trying to live righteous lives, so if a Jew repents his sin directly to God (instead of to Jesus) and tries to live a good life, why does this result in eternal damnation? Is this the response of a loving parent whose child asks for forgiveness? Is this truly what you want to believe?

Being an atheist may be "rational," but reason is only one facet of what it means to be human. By denying and suppressing your spiritual nature, you live only half the life you were meant to live. We all have spiritual hunger, and it needs to be fed by something deeper and greater than the boundaries of our finite minds. Listening to classical music and looking at great art isn't enough.

Let us also ponder the fact that the atheist regimes of Hitler, Stalin and Mao were responsible for the imprisonment, torture, and death of more people in the 20th century ALONE than any religious body in the last 2,000 years. Very "rational"!

I was an agnostic for decades before I came into the Catholic Church as a mature, rational adult. For the last 12 years I have deepened my understanding of the Church's teachings and I am a very happy Catholic. The main reason for people walking away from the Church today is that they don't want to take responsibility for the way they live their lives. Going to Mass every Sunday interferes with sleeping late and watching sports.

People who have been living together and haven't been to Mass in years decide, for sentimental reasons, that they would like to be married in the Church. They're told that they have to stop living together, start attending Mass, and take instruction on what it means to live in a Christian marriage. But that's too much trouble, so they blame the Church for their own defects and go someplace that's more "welcoming" - that is to say, with lower, or no, moral standards.

I'm happy to say that the restoration of the Church has already begun. More and more people are taking a good look at the Church and converting. More and more young people are living, and raising their children, according to the teachings of the Church. I'm afraid that anyone who is looking forward to the demise of the Church anytime soon is going to be very disappointed.

Ms. Jacoby:

I don't think your response goes to the point. I doubt anyone would disagree with you about hate-filled speech.

I would like to see you address Serena's post. I agree with her entirely. As writers, we have certain responsibilities, notwithstanding "freedom of speech."

Looks like Spidey has stumbled on a major prophesy here! A quick web check reveals that Michael was the second most popular boy baby name in 2006, but in 1906 it wasn't even in the top 20. Now if we can just figure out how that could possibly be important.....

Arminius

What do you think the odds are that the statistics of incredible decline in the Catholic church that Susan quotes will magically reverse themselves?

I'd put the odds at about 0%.

Organized religion is fading on this planet, and will continue to do so as humanity becomes more scientifically informed and spiritually enlightened.

To Jonathan:

I loved your post especially the last part on evolution.

I worked for a couple of guys that I'm pretty sure, haven't travelled all the way up the evolutionary trail. Maybe that's why I built my own software company.

Former Christian, you are my best friend here, and Spiderman2 (named after a great movie) is my favorite opponent.

FC: I love how you have dissected the prophecy problem. I just want to add on to it. I preemptively predict(!) sooner or later Spidey is going to point out how Isaiah in 700 BC predicted an accurate description of the politics of 500 BC. I do not claim to be "inspired" in this prediction but am using probability and common sense. Isaiah is a retrodiction, ie a forgery like the Kensington Rune Stone. Anyone except Fundamentalists recognized that half or all of the Book of Isaiah was written in 500 BC using the name of the man of 700 BC. Hindsight prophecies are always correct. The Book of Daniel (with the lions den story et al) was written in 165 BC and retrojected into a time 400 years earlier. Spidey's favorite, Revelation, is a false prophet. I know the passages he describes, and which countries they refer to--they are countries which stopped existing over 1500 years ago. This prophecy was simply wishful thinking which did not come true, so modern literalists have reassigned all the descriptions to modern lands.

Another obvious trait of Bible "prophecy" is that it is vague and prolific--just like that of Nostradamus or any horoscope. Make a bunch of trivial, obvious statements--it will rain one day, the sun will go east-to-west, someone will declare war on someone, someone will be born in Bethlehem, someone will ride a donkey. Then add in a bunch of specific place names, angel names (Michael was an angel not a man), and common names (Bob, Joe, Billy etc), and repeat this process 1000 times. Then you will have many prophecies all over the map, within the realm of probability, so sooner or later someone will do something that matches up with some of the words. If some prophecies don't come true, just say they will some day. (Or just SAY something has happened when it hasn't. The Birth at Bethlehem and Slaughter of the Innocents were stories made up to "fulfill" prophecy.)

Prophecies can be fulfilled deliberately as well. Israel was rebuilt in 1948 just as the Bible said it would, because the founding fathers used the Bible as a how-to book. The existence of that prophecy made it happen. I bet the commanders on all sides of today's wars are doing the same, choosing tactics and alliances a certain way BECAUSE the Bible says they do. No rocket science needed.

Speaking of science, evolution has been proved. My sister is a gorilla.

WaPo is blocking posts again.

once again, a discussion on faith almost immediately takes on an ugly, personal tone that is either hilarious or frightening, depending upon your point of view. all goes to demonstrate once again the founding fathers' wisdom in separating church and state. nothing scarier than a fanatic with the power to act out his or her fantasies.

and as far as i am gifted this morning, the reference Verses are Corinthians 11:17 and 11:34

Dear Spidey,

Isn't it just a tad arrogant to think that only you, have the full understanding of the bible? Of course, I could pull a verse out of the bible. Let's do that:

When a slave-owner strikes a male or female slave with a rod and the slave dies immediately, the owner shall be punished. But if the slave survives for a day or two, there is no punishment; for the slave is the owner’s property. [Exodus, chapter 21]

Okay spidey, do you understand what the rod means in this verse?

It's easy to do what you are doing and takes no more than a few brain cells to do it. I'm still waiting for that specific prophesy that's in the bible.......Hmmm maybe I just missed it. Maybe the bible spoke about the emergence of nuclear power in the 20th century and maybe it predicted the internet and a global digital network.

I must be too blind to have seen it because I haven't seen any prophesies predicting anything other than some wars. Wow, what amazing prophesy.

Williams Bush is against gay marriage, abortion, stem cells, as is Pope Benedictus. moreover, Williams Bush hangs and executes men. so Williams Bush is not Episcopal.

this reminded me Romans Corinthians 10-17, where Letter of Paul about Resurrection of Dead is in, but especially 11:34, "i shall give You the directions when i come Home"

E Fav:

I think we need to watch out for those heathens trying to close the "Michael Gap." *Chuckles*

Really, the nonsense level does keep rising, doesn't it?

E Fav:

I think we need to watch out for those heathens trying to close the "Michael Gap." *Chuckles*

Really, the nonsense level does keep rising, doesn't it?

I Get it!

The Lord is coming soon - right here to the country with the most Michaels in it.

Thanks, Lord, for giving us this clever advance notice.

For most, the great appeal of religion is the promise of life after death.
Death is a scary reality. I do not look forward to it. It must be nice to believe that one does not die, but flies off to Paradise instead. Wish I could believe that, but I can't.

It seems like the kind of promise a snakeoil saleman would make.
He knows what scares us all; and he has the antidote. Religion. Believe, and you'll never have to worry about death anymore.

As scared as I might be, I can't just DECIDE to believe that which is clearly nonsensical. My brain refuses to to allow me to believe that which makes no sense.

Spidey's fear dominates his perception. He seems scared enough to believe anything that says he aint gonna die. And in trying to persuade others here, it looks very much like he's really trying desperately to persuade himself.

"And at that time shall Michael stand up, the great prince which standeth for the children of thy people.." (Daniel 12:1)

Do you know that the name Michael is the most common American name today which did not happened during it's earlier years?

Now figure that out what that prophecy means. If you don't understand that, I won't be surprised.

See ya later guys. Continue searching.

The three Abrahamic religions have in common myths from early ages of written history that don't support the spirit as much as a series of lessons designed to affect behavior. Such "factual history" is defended as the literal word of God and these "facts" are used to cow people into submission.

Survival of these religions absolutely depends on brainwashing from the earliest possible age to have necessary generational support over time. One heck of a system, what child has the armor to resist?

These religions have been responsible for more suffering through torture, death and imprisonment of the mind than all wars summed.

A person's religious views should not begin to be formed until they are young adults. This approach is well feared by the "big 3" as they know that pretty much everyone would abandon these religions as nothing but ritualistic fantasy games.

Let a person find his faith later in life. This does not preclude a teaching of moral, ethical and lawful behavior earlier in life.

Asim, Asim, Asim,

A look at Islam?? Hmmm, and we find this:

Mohammed was an illiterate, womanizing, lust and greed-driven, warmongering, hallucinating Arab, who also had embellishing/hallucinating/ plagiarizing scribal biographers who not only added "angels" aka "pretty wingie thingies" and flying chariots to the koran but also a militaristic agenda to support the plundering and looting of the lands of non-believers.

This agenda continues as shown by the assassination of Bhutto, the conduct of the seven Muslim doctors in the UK, the 9/11 terrorists, the 24/7 Sunni suicide/roadside/market/mosque bombers, the 24/7 Shiite suicide/roadside/market/mosque bombers, the Islamic bombers of the trains in the UK and Spain, the Bali crazies, the Kenya crazies, the Pakistani “koranics”, the Palestine suicide bombers/rocketeers, the Lebanese nutcases, the Taliban nut jobs, and the Filipino “koranics”.

And who funds these acts of terror? The warmongering, Islamic, Shiite terror and torture theocracy of Iran aka the Third Axis of Evil and also the Sunni "Wannabees" of Saudi Arabia.

No need to look for added information!!!!

JG says, “Being an Atheist because of a bad experience in your faith growing up simply robs you of something great. You can stray from organized religion and still have faith deep in your heart. You are letting The Catholic Faith own too much of your thoughts and beliefs if you protest by concluding there is no God. Seems sad and silly to me.”

First, Ditto what Andrew said.

Then, please don’t advise Susan or anyone, based on your narrow presumptions about why people leave religion. If you want to know their reasons for becoming atheist, ask them.

I, for one, don’t feel robbed of anything “great” because I left Catholicism. I enjoyed going to church as a kid and when I was in my teens, and started thinking about things and seeing the excesses of the church in Europe, I gradually fell away from the church. It was not a protest, it was common sense.

Eventually concluding that there was no basis for belief in God was not a protest either. It too was common sense, along with research on the Bible, archeology and history that make it evident that Christianity is myth based, just like the religions that preceded it.

A Different Point of View

“If Christianity cannot explain why God would place a deadly apple in front of people who have no way of knowing that eating the apple is a bad thing and then making the penalty for those two eating the apple be that billions of people go to hell because the follow the non-Christian religion their parents teach them, then I cannot fathom why people would follow such a religion. “

The only reason I can see is they were taught to believe this nonsense from early childhood and haven’t taken the time or have the wit to see what it actually says. Dogma like Original Sin, the idea that an omnipotent, loving deity would condemn innocent people to an eternity of suffering for not following the one and only true belief system that isn’t even revealed until after they die, and similar concepts to be the height of immorality. That concept of God is neither moral nor loving nor just.

I, for one, doubt that religion will fade away. It fulfills a basic emotional need in many people, even if I have never felt that need myself. I do have hope that it will become less hateful, self destructive, and irrational, but then reading some of the posts on this blog, I don’t have a lot of hope that it will come soon here in the U.S.

Atheist and loving it.

"And at that time shall Michael stand up, the great prince which standeth for the children of thy people.." (Daniel 12:1)

Do you know that the name Michael is the most common American name today which did not happened during it's earlier years?

Now figure that out what that prophecy means. If you don't understand that, I won't be surprised.

Anonymous, I got lost too thru constant searching. Just continue searching and you'll find Him. God rewards the diligent.

Well Spider, it's easy to call someone stupid or blind or ignorant. It takes a little thought to support your conclusions.

You've failed to support any of your arguments, you haven't cited specific bible verses. Even I, as blinded as I am to your understanding of the truth, have backed up my statements with specific bible verses.

Again, put up or shut up. You've made brash statements about a lot of people and a lot of things, but you haven't provided even a hint of evidence to back up any of your statements. To me, you are speaking like a true person of faith -- all talk and no evidence.

Spiderman2

You say, keep asking questions, that's how you found the lord.

Funny. That's how I lost the lord. I kept asking questions, and all I got were really ridiculous answers, until it came to me, it was all hogwash. Religion that is. Hogwash. They aint no lord. No Heaven. No afterlife. Its all in the mind.

God is as real as Santa Claus and The Easter Bunny.

It is obvious that not only you don't understand the Bible, you also don't understand my posts. Case closed.

For the record, he's stopping at Nationals Park before he arrives at Yankee Stadium. At least he's got his priorites straight there.

To Spidey,

On the one hand you state that the prophesies are to be taken literally and on the other hand you talk about the metaphorical understanding of the bible.

It seems to me you either have to take the bible literally or metaphorically. You can't have it both ways because it would require judgment and interpretation to decide which to take literally and which not to.

A metaphor is a figure of speech. Where did I contradict myself?

Spiderman wrote: Stupidity has no cure. How can I interpret the prophecies in the Bible if I considered them all as literal?

And also wrote: This shows the ignorance of the Catholic faith. Christ was not referring to the literal bread. It is the word of God, the Bible, that transforms the person. The bread will feed the body but the Word of God will feed the soul.

The Catholic Church is an institution that SPREADS THE IGNORANCE.

Christ uses figures of speech but idiots don't get it.

Explain to me how this is not "interpretation".

I call it to their attention when stupidity becomes unbearable. Don't resort to lies so nobody gets called stupid.

I guess spider that when you have no arguments to make, you resort to name calling. My god can beat up your god.

ZZIM - can you explain what you mean by this statement? "Susan goes around claiming to have absolute truth and moral authority on her side, and sneers at and cuts down anyone who holds an opposing view. Then she accuses those who disagree with her of sneering at and denigrating those who hold points of view she agrees with! Hmm, I wonder what's going on here? Susan, are you a pot or a kettle?"

I don't think you are reading the same post as the rest of us. Susan's post mostly points out the plain fact that Catholics are voting with their feet and leaving the church. Where does she claim absolute truth and morality, or "sneer at those who hold an opposing point of view?"

Former Christian wrote : "Spidey boy may want to take a more literal interpretation of the bible"

Stupidity has no cure. How can I interpret the prophecies in the Bible if I considered them all as literal?

Asim MA wrote "I sincerely wish that you would take a serious look at Islam"

I almost fell to my chair. My body jerked and motioned as if trying to say, WHAaaaaT?

Would you like Susan cover her whole face like most devout muslims do?

Did God gave you a face to be covered?

To Jimbo56:

You see the problem with religion in general is that each one has their own truths and in many cases, never the twain shall meet. So whereas Spidey boy may want to take a more literal interpretation of the bible you seem to be happy with a more symbolic representation.

And yet the fact remains that the big guy upstairs never unambiguously intervenes so that believers know which way to go.

The result: some believers fly airplanes into buildings with complete confidence that they will go to paradise and be welcomed by 72 dark eyed virgins.

Others will work tirelessly to ease the suffering of HIV infected people but never think about distributing condoms because they have complete faith that God does not want artificial birth control. So God would rather see 12 million more orphans in Africa than allow the use of birth control.

And again, God will remain completely silent on the issue because there's no one up there to respond.

Susan,
Your's is a scholarly piece. How could such a rational person be an athiest?? Is it the abuse and tilted interpretations of the various scrpitures that turned you off??

I sincerely wish that you would take a serious look at Islam with the open mind set you have and rational and logical posture you display-perhaps you will change your mind.

JG

People don't quit a religion because of a bad faith experience...though I'm sure it helps.

People quit religion for all sorts of reasons, but surely the main reason is because in this modern world religion is looking more and more like one fairy story amongst a whole lot of other fairy stories that have been dragged into the 21st century, when they should have been left behind hundreds of years ago.

Religion is dying a very slow death, but dying just the same. I think it will pick up speed as more and more people see the light, and will be sidelined in the way astrology and alchemy were sidelined after centuries of great influence.

Time, science and universal education are all on the side of the atheist. The more we know, the more absurd religion appears.

To A different point of view,

Jimbo56 wrote "The old testament was passed down for centuries through oral tradition. did it happen exactly as written? Maybe it did, maybe it didn't."

What kind of advice you can get from a person who doubts the Bible? Take them with a grain of salt. They are false.

To A different point of view:

All excellent comments and observations. To add to what you said, Jesus says the following:

In Mark 11:24:
Therefore I tell you, whatever you ask for in prayer, believe that you have received it, and it will be yours.

Jesus says in Matthew 21:21:

I tell you the truth, if you have faith and do not doubt, not only can you do what was done to the fig tree, but also you can say to this mountain, 'Go, throw yourself into the sea,' and it will be done. If you believe, you will receive whatever you ask for in prayer.

In Matthew 17:20 Jesus says:

For truly, I say to you, if you have faith as a grain of mustard seed, you will say to this mountain, 'Move from here to there,' and it will move; and nothing will be impossible to you.

If the bible is to be believed, it seems that people of faith should be able to do some amazing things. And yet, last Friday 4 people obn a mission trip whose safety was prayed for, were killed in a car accident. Now, when a church prays for a mission team (including this car full of people), we can assume that some of them have faith. Why were they killed?

In fact, where is there one shred of evidence that there is a God who intervenes in our lives?

To A different point of view.

A couple of answers to the questions you've posed. First, suffering is part of the human condition. what I've learned through faith is that "healing" sometimes comes in the form of acceptance of one's own destiny. Certainly, Pope John Paul II was an excellent example of that. Never did he say, "Why me?" He accepted that this was his destiny. The suffering we bear here on earth, no matter how bad, is nothing by comparison to an eternity of joy. I am no expert, but I believe that up until this point in time, every human has died at some point.

As for Adam and Eve, one has to assume that the fruit is a metaphor for temptation or some other form of disobedience. One also must read and realize that Satan placed the temptation in front of Adam and Eve.

One of the things that seperates Catholicism from Evangelical Christians is the belief that God inspired the words in the Bible, but they are not written by God. The old testament was passed down for centuries through oral tradition. did it happen exactly as written? Maybe it did, maybe it didn't. Is it fundamentally true that at some point, there were the first man and woman and by human nature they sinned? Well, that is easy enough to accept. Sin is a part or our humanity.

People who lack faith seem to be stuck in the here and now, and tend not to look beyond their own personal sphere. "It hasn't helped me so it must not be true". However, the challange of faith is to put IT before our own needs and desires. That is tough.

We have people who write about how out of touch the Catholic church is, or any church, because it doesn't support their views or positions. Is that the fault of the church or is that an issue that one can't seem to find fault within oneself?
Nobody is perfect, we are all sinners, even the Pope. In fact, I would guess the Pope is much more aware of his faults and shortcoming than the majority of us.

My point is that many who oppose religion have problems with it because it won't support some of their actions. They can't look within themselves and find fault, so we must fault religion in general.

A Different Point of View,

The Adam and Eve story is something that I cannot answer well. It's better for me to keep silent about it than make comments that may come out to be false. But about people who are going to hell if they have not heard the gospel of Christ, that is not accurate. According to Apostle Paul, they will be judged by their conscience. But those who have heard the gospel and did not believe will be judged by their unbelief.

Keep asking questions. That was how I found the Lord. Read the Bible also and learn from it directly.

Well, sadly JG, respect is something foreign to Susan. But that's just somethin' you're going to have to get used to.

As another lapsed Catholic/atheist I've been forced over the course of a lifetime to root around the same concepts and problems you have. I've never been particularly hung up on the "infallibility" issue, because as the nuns in my Catholic school sensibly described it, the concept really means that the pope is supposed to be considered the final referee on theological questions, not that he can't make an error.

In considering the question of what value the church has in the modern world and what it should try to be, I'm struck by the extent to which the church, in spite of its archaic structure, is still the standard bearer for the pure socialist impulse embedded in the New Testament. All of the social institutions that make us civilized--public schools, hospitals, hospices, universities--are the inventions of the medieval church. I'm not sure the church can be reformed and retain that, because its baseline supporters in America are now essentially protestant in their world view, unwilling or unable to see the collective responsibility built into the Gospels.

If I had to choose an example of what modern Catholics would hope to become and still remain Catholic I would point to Mormonism. That churches' voluntary socialism and voluntary collectivism encapsulated within a modern structure--though not adequately equal with regard to women--is what American Catholics should shoot for. Mormon emphasis on family and good upbringing for children coincides very well with Catholic values. If Catholics could trust and believe in their church then the well-dressed and polite young people who show up at your door on a Saturday morning might be Catholics rather than Mormons.

The tragedy for the church is that tradition has it in a death grip. Who could have imagined that 1500 years after Constantine the official pagan priesthood of the Roman Empire, with all of its culture of secretive ritual, patriarchalism, celibacy, fetishistic ritual decor, and imperial bureaucracy would survive intact? Can we even imagine what Catholicism would look like without those things?

I suppose everyone has a right to express what they perceive as truth. I am a lapsed Catholic but a Catholic all the same.
I enjoyed your article but saying "When John died" did turn my stomach a bit.
Twelve years in Catholic school and having MANY friends that want NOTHING to do with The Church OR religion, I am open to all views, and I respect them. I have faith in my heart. But to just call Pope John Paul II "John" seems like an attempt to blatantly disrespect him, and the people who may have a love and respect for him.
Being an Atheist because of a bad experience in your faith growing up simply robs you of something great. You can stray from organized religion and still have faith deep in your heart. You are letting The Catholic Faith own too much of your thoughts and beliefs if you protest by concluding there is no God. Seems sad and silly to me.
Notice, I put certain words in CAPS... Including Atheist, it is called respect.

I have two questions that I pose to Spiderman2 and Chicago or anyone else who wishes to answer.

1) Jesus says repeatedly in the New Testament that people's faith healed them and that those who had faith, even as small as a mustard seed, would be able to perform the same miracles as he.

How do we explain that Pope John Paul II had Parkinson's Disease? Did the pope not have faith or is the bible wrong?

2) Christianity is based on the premise that because Adam and Eve ate the forbidden apple all of humankind is born into original sin and needs to be saved by Jesus. If "we who are evil" (to paraphrase Jesus) would never put anything as deadly as the apple in the Garden of Eden to begin with, why would a loving and wise God.

I have seen many Christian bloggers reply that Adam and Eve disobeyed God. But why should we be punished for what they did? We didn't eat the apple. Moreover, the bible says that Adam and Eve did not know the difference between good and evil. When God said don't eat the apple and the serpent said to Adam and Eve, God put it there for you, on what basis were Adam and Eve to know that God was the good guy and was to be listened to and the serpent the bad guy and to be ignored? How were Adam and Eve supposed to know that they were doing something bad by disobeying God? and if we who are evil would stop our children from drinking poison (even if we warned them against it in the first place), why would God who is good and omniscient allow BOTH Adam and Eve to eat the apple? Finally, since only 2 billion of the 6 billion people on earth are Christian, isn't it a bit cruel and unusual punishment to send 4 billion people (plus the billions of non-Christians who have lived previously) to eternal Hell, just because two people who didn't know what they were doing ate an apple thousands of years ago? If we who are evil do not punish people for crimes they don't commit, then why would God who is good?

If Christianity cannot explain why God would place a deadly apple in front of people who have no way of knowing that eating the apple is a bad thing and then making the penalty for those two eating the apple be that billions of people go to hell because the follow the non-Christian religion their parents teach them, then I cannot fathom why people would follow such a religion.

I have two questions that I pose to Spiderman2 and Chicago or anyone else who wishes to answer.

1) Jesus says repeatedly in the New Testament that people's faith healed them and that those who had faith, even as small as a mustard seed, would be able to perform the same miracles as he.

How do we explain that Pope John Paul II had Parkinson's Disease? Did the pope not have faith or is the bible wrong?

2) Christianity is based on the premise that because Adam and Eve ate the forbidden apple all of humankind is born into original sin and needs to be saved by Jesus. If "we who are evil" (to paraphrase Jesus) would never put anything as deadly as the apple in the Garden of Eden to begin with, why would a loving and wise God.

I have seen many Christian bloggers reply that Adam and Eve disobeyed God. But why should we be punished for what they did? We didn't eat the apple. Moreover, the bible says that Adam and Eve did not know the difference between good and evil. When God said don't eat the apple and the serpent said to Adam and Eve, God put it there for you, on what basis were Adam and Eve to know that God was the good guy and was to be listened to and the serpent the bad guy and to be ignored? How were Adam and Eve supposed to know that they were doing something bad by disobeying God? and if we who are evil would stop our children from drinking poison (even if we warned them against it in the first place), why would God who is good and omniscient allow BOTH Adam and Eve to eat the apple? Finally, since only 2 billion of the 6 billion people on earth are Christian, isn't it a bit cruel and unusual punishment to send 4 billion people (plus the billions of non-Christians who have lived previously) to eternal Hell, just because two people who didn't know what they were doing ate an apple thousands of years ago? If we who are evil do not punish people for crimes they don't commit, then why would God who is good?

If Christianity cannot explain why God would place a deadly apple in front of people who have no way of knowing that eating the apple is a bad thing and then making the penalty for those two eating the apple be that billions of people go to hell because the follow the non-Christian religion their parents teach them, then I cannot fathom why people would follow such a religion.

I too am a former Catholic, actually a former Catholic priest. I too am an atheist. I too think the Catholic church, and religion in general, has run its course. The woes of the Catholic church are not due to the sex scandals but to the education of its members to the real world, not the world of myths. The surge of Hispanic members that bolster the count of Catholics will subside rapidly as the next two generataions are more and more educated and can see the myths for what they are. Thanks for the column, keep writing.

I really don't like people like Susan. Susan goes around claiming to have absolute truth and moral authority on her side, and sneers at and cuts down anyone who holds an opposing view. Then she accuses those who disagree with her of sneering at and denigrating those who hold points of view she agrees with! Hmm, I wonder what's going on here? Susan, are you a pot or a kettle?

Maybe you could learn about tolerance. That might help.

What's wrong with Catholicism is they invent doctrines like the catechism.

Even before these false teachings appeared , God already knew this coming. In Revelation 2:2 , we can read His prophetic verse, " I know thy works, and thy labor, and thy patience, and how thou canst not bear them which are evil : and thou hast tried (or tested) them who say they are apostles (RC's creed of apostolic succesion), but are not, and hast found them LIARS. "

LIARS and those who believe in their church are followers of lies.

Once again, Susan writes through the eyes of a fallen Christian. It is a question of is the glass half full or half empty.

I have been a lifelong Catholic and am active and involved in my faith. As an adult, I have spent time learning more about religion in general, my Catholic faith in particular. What I've come to believe is that if I were to go looking for a religion, I would end up Catholic for many of the reasons Susan has a problem with the church.

I like the fact that the Catholic faith is universal in it's beliefs. Other Protestant churches have an incosistancy in teachings from church to church. Some will say gay marriage is acceptable, others will say it's a sin. Who is right? For better or worse, the Catholic faith is universally consistant with it's teachings.

Clearly, Susan has no understanding of some of the teachings, which isn't uncommon even among Catholics. The concept of "Papal Infallibility" for example. Does this mean that a Pope is incapable of sin or mistakes? NO. All this means is that when a Pope make a statement or prints an encyclical, it's the inspired word of God. So, Benedict's encyclicals on "Love" are what's infallible, not him as a human.

As for the church's stance on other topics. What one needs to keep in mind is that even though society and the world may change, what is right and wrong don't.

Contraception, or more specifically artificial contraception. The church believes that sexual intercourse inside the bonds of marriage serves two specific purposes. First, it guarantees the continuation of the human race; reproduction. Secondly, it is a gift from God to deepen intimacy and love inside of a marriage. By introducing artificial contraception, you are clearly taking away from BOTH purposes. Or as my Mother put it, there is a difference between having sex and making love. The church supports the latter.

As for married priest or women in the priesthood. It would seem that this would be an obvious thing. However, neither is going to change with this Pope. What I have come to understand is simply this. If one is truly called to serve God, than one doesn't get hung up on titles or position. Rather, one follows where one is lead. Those who argue this point clearly aren't being called to serve, they are mostly calling to serve themselves.

No religion is without faults. Some are more obvious than others. But at the heart of most religion, is a good and loving God. If we can get beyond our own human issues, it's a wonderful eperience.

Okay Spidey, so show me the money. Open my eyes. Tell me about these prophesies that are documented in the bible and have turned out to be true. Or are these prophesies so cryptic that not only are you the only person in the world who can understand them, but they can't be explained to anyone else.

I'm a basic kind of business owner and technology person so maybe I haven't evolved enough -- oh wait, let me put it more accurately -- maybe I wasn't intelligently designed well enough to understand all the predictions in the bible.

I'm still waiting for a single, specific prediction that backs up any of your statements...Just one prediction that has come true that was specified in the bible. Just one.

Susan,

Excellent! Excellent! Excellent! I have never read anything written better about the agony of religion and the Catholic Church. After 12 years of Catholic "education" in the '50's and '60's, I walked away from it all 40 years ago and have never looked back.

I especially like your phrase, "come, let us reason together". But, I suppose, if we could all do that, then there would be no need for religion. Yeah!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Jim Morgan
Warwick,RI

Religions may have been actively involved in the easing of the human condition, but I am more aware of conversion by the sword (the first case being that of the Edomites by the Jews in Maccabean times) and of burning at the stake and of Inquisitorial suppression of dissent. The benefits are a matter of theory; the harm is clear and present.

I am prejudiced against religion because I know the history of religion, and it is the history of human misery and of black crimes.

I have written on religion and science and have never made any secret of the fact that I am an atheist. My feeling is, quite simply, that if there is a God, he has done such a bad job that He isn't worth discussing.

Isaac Asimov. from "The Letters of Isaac Azimov".pp319

I was "sort of" raised Catholic in the 50's and early 60's too. My Father, a Catholic, dutifully took us to church and saturday catechism classes.
It was his own apparent unhappiness with the church that first made me skeptical. But I hung in there until a college atmosphere away from home set my mind free. Sadly, he died before we had a good conversation as adults.
I do credit the church with something the majority protestants lack: a belief that all humans are god's creatures, equally deserving of his love and equally entitled to salvation. This is the true meaning of catholic: universal. Of course the so-called "conservative" catholics are really more like the religious right generally, in that they believe themselves to be personally saved-- and believe in the violence we practice as Americans, assuming the victims of our agression to be of lesser value and expendable. That sad fact means there is nowhere a true "catholic" (universal) faith can be found in major american religion. One either believes in calvinist predestination, literal reading of the KJV, or some personal baptismal ceremony, as the key to being "saved". The non-saved majority are just so many expendable "extras" on the sets of their lives.
Now, I'm a UU, and base my religion on respect for other creatures of God; on principles rather than infallible human leadership.

Former Christian wrote "Why are you convinced that your interpretations are correct and all others wrong?"

Because I've seen the events happening right before my eyes exactly how the Bible had predicted it. Everything is there in the Bible but blind people like you can't see it no matter how hard you'll try. Including the pope.

Susan ultimately the Pope doesn't make anyone catholic. Nor does the church save anyone - its God, a God you no longer believe exists. Unfortunately, you probably never had a very strong notion of who God was to begin with. Sounds like you family watered down their ideological differences. Instead of bringing to the forefront the rich Jewish traditions you father sounds like he was very passive and your mother in attempt not to offend never pushed the strong Irish catholic traditions of the rosary, weekly confession, daily mass, veneration of the saints, the teachings of St. Thomas Aquinas or even the basic structure of Aristotelian thought that western thought is based on and who was a monotheist even though brought up in the Arayan Sky Gods tradition.
Sad.
Unfortunately, for your position science has been forced to adopt a initial point - the big bang theory - confirmed by a Jesuit no less - even noted atheist Stephen Hawking has admitted there must be some sort of God - yet you go on your merry way pretending that your position has some intellectual credence - it does not - again.
Sad.
God luck in the next life Susan - I hope that turns out ok.

A further comment for those who continue to raise the question of "censorship." The owner of the blog--the entire blog "On Faith"--is The Washington Post Company. One of the worst effects of the anonymity and lack of editorial scrutiny on the Internet is the mistaken belief of bloggers that they have an absolute right to publish comments wherever they want. Anyone can set up his or her own blog, but you do not have a right to be published by a particular blog. Indeed, this applies to professional writers on and off the Web. I've often had articles rejected by one magazine--and had to place them elsewhere--because the editors didn't like what I'd written. It's their call. Editors don't have an obligation to publish what anyone writes. In a society with a free press, all writers are free to take their work elsewhere.

Again I must emphasize that I have nothing to do with vetting comments. If I did, I'd probably toss more of them in the recycle bin. An example is one comment this week suggesting that atheists have no more business writing about Catholics than Hitler had writing about Jews. I'd have deleted that comment instantly, because the clear implication is that atheists, like Hitler, want to exterminate people. No such comment would ever pass the scrutiny applied to letters to the editor of print editions. They would be thrown in the trash where they belong.

Jeanne McN:

If you go to religions.pewforums.org you will find the breakdown. The numbers account for the conversions to Catholicism, of which there have been some very high profiles.

To all:

Rob Koons is one of those: a convert to Catholicism and has posted some very brilliant notes on how a Lutheran looks at Catholicism on the web.

I really wish the WaPo had posted an article by a demographer about the trend of American Catholicism. (Full Disclosure: I trained in demography.) It has to been seen in the context of the great migrations of the early 20th century, the assimilation of 2nd and 3rd immigrants into Am society, the migrations within the US, basically from the Catholic North to the Protestant South.

All the best to all,
Mary Cunningham
London

What else can one expect from Vat II post hoc ergo propter hoc.John Carroll S.J. was a modernist in sheeps clothing.Jadot loaded the American episcopacy with heretics, perverts, and the like.Paul VI was an unmitigated disaster.

Spidey, me thinks your spider senses are failing you. I asked for a specific prophesy in the bible. You are trying to give me hints of future events. Show me one that was specifically predicted in the bible and it needs to be more than bad people will fight each other.

I used the Catholic prohibition against birth control to try (apparently, I did a poor job of it) and illustrate that each religion holds beliefs equally separated from evidence and reason.

You've supplied nothing tangible other than to say the bible is like Prego spegetti sauce -- it's in there.

Why are you convinced that your interpretations are correct and all others wrong?

MaryCunningham, The pope is insane for not knowing what he's been doing. He is a devil's representative for claiming he represents Christ when nothing in him really represents the true Christ.

Spiderman2 aka Canyon Shearer et al,

Again:

What "voodooer of the hoodoo" blessed you with such stupidity in the field of fortune telling and interpretations of said stupidity???

Well, spider2 you have complained that you are called "extreme" when, in fact, you are merely speaking the truth like Lot over Sodom. You have also said the pope is 1)insane (and you would put him in an insane asylum) 2)the devil's representative. Which is the truth? If you think someone is from the devil, shouldn't you kill him?
Insane people cannot help being insane. Insane and evil incarnate are different.

That's the problem with No Faith. The atheism and anti-Catholicism of a Ms Jacoby is mixed in with Scots-Irish 'No Popery' prejudice of the young Ian Paisley. Catholics field abuse from both directions. It's an evil mix. Disturbs me a lot.

This will be all from me.

Professor Crossan et al's "take" on the historic foundation of the papacy:

John 14: 26 not historic ( 62-. Spirit under Trial: (1) 1Q: Luke 12:11-12 = Matt
10:19-20; (2) Mark 13:11 = Matt 10: 19-20 = Luke 21:14-15; (3) John 14:26.)

Matt 16: 18-19 not historic (73- Who Is Jesus?: (1) Gos. Thom. 13; (2a) Mark
8:27-30 = Matt 16:13-20 = Luke 9:18-21; (2b) Gos. Naz. 14; (2c) John 6:67-69.)

1 Timothy- not written by St. Paul (See Crossan’s “In Search of Paul”, Harper, San
Francisco, 2004, p.105)

2 Peter 1:20
Since Schillebeeckx basically ruled out prophecies by concluding God does not know
the future, one can rule out the infallible nature of this verse.

Also from Raymond Brown’s, An Introduction to the New Testament, 2 Peter was
the last canonical work written i.e. ~ 130 AD, author unknown. Tis a bit dated for use in claiming infallibility plus the verse is not from Jesus or Peter but some possible remembrance of a scribe.

Conclusion: The papacy has no historical or scriptural foundations.

Some added references:

1. faithfutures.org/Jesus/Crossan1.rtf,
2. faithfutures.org/Jesus/Crossan2.rtf,
3. faithfutures.org/Jesus/Crossan2.rtf,
4. faithfutures.org/index.php/Crossan_Inventory,
5. Professor Crossan's books, The Historic Jesus, Excavating Jesus, In Search of Paul, Who is Jesus, and The Birth of Christianity,
6. Schillebeeckx's Church: The Human Story of God, Crossroad, 1993, p.91 (softcover)

With respect to Catholicism being the only true religion i.e God's people:

Professor Crossan's view from his book, Who is Jesus:

"When I look a Buddhist friend in the face, I cannot say with integrity, "Our story about Jesus' virginal birth is true and factual. Your story that when the Buddha came out of his
mother's womb, he was walking, talking, teaching and preaching (which I must admit is even better than our story)---that's a myth. We have
the truth; you have a lie."

I don't think that can be said any longer, for our insistence that our faith is a fact and that others' faith is a lie is, I think, a cancer that eats at the heart of Christianity".

I think you are trying to make a point of the uselessness of the Catholic Faith, but for one who grew up in the same era as you I think you are very very mistaken in your views.
You need to check into the number of conversions INTO the Catholic Faith lately, check out those who have taken the the Rite of Christian Initiation for Adults this year in our faith.
Check out the numbers of Episcopalians entering our church because they feel their own church has done them a horrible injustice by spineless changing of viewson issues of morality to suit the modernistic modes of secular humanism.
I for one would be really interested in just what you REALLY believe in?

Former Christian wrote "If God really was against any kind of birth control, "

Catholicism is not the voice of god and I never mentioned God is against birth control.

Understand what I say so I won't be repetitive.

The use of the word "infallible" in regards to the pope is misleading. In over 2,000 years, all the popes combined have issued only 3 infallible statements and all have to do with the basic tenets of faith. Everything the pope says is not considered or even meant to be considered infallible. Before you mean to knock any pope off his pedestal, make sure there is an actual pedestal and not one borne out of ignorance/failure to check the facts/anti-whatever propaganda. Statements such as these that are clear distortions of the truth throw the rest of the article into disarray.

Former Christian wrote : "Predicting wars in the middle east and calling it accurate is like predicting that I'll visit a bathroom sometime today."

What if I say that the U.S will battle more than 12 countries at once? Would that be a very accurate prediction? Did it come to your mind that it will happen and was that as easy as your bathroom rituals?

Do you know what are those more than 12 countries? Can you name them? Im just using the number 12 to hide the clues but I can even name the exact number of countries and which one.

Just hang on there coz it would be revealed when the time is ripe. I hope Pentagon listens so they won't be so vulnerable.

It is people like you who like to see institutions that made the world etc great.
People like you have made the problems we have today. Who cares what your opinion is. If a Catholic leaves so be it, leave the others alone.
Maybe you should be more worried about poverty,
jobs, housing and the education systems and all the other problems. The 50's, 60's etc were great years that we will never see again, thanks to all the liberalism you have help to create.

to Spidey (since we've posted so many times, I'm assuming a more familiar name).

The idea that the bible is the least bit specific with prophesy doesn't jive. Predicting wars in the middle east and calling it accurate is like predicting that I'll visit a bathroom sometime today. Accurate, but certainly not very challenging.

I've give you examples of how I could believe the bible was the word of God if there was anything miraculous about it -- like being able to read and understand it no matter what your language.

I'll give you another -- if the bible was specific in its prophesy such as in the latter 20th century mankind would create a global, interconnected network of computers. Or how about mathematical formula that even today, we are struggling to comprehend. But the bible contains none of that. There is nothing in the bible that couldn't have been written by someone 2,000 years ago -- and it's not particularly well written either since it contradicts itself all over the place.

I'm also waiting for your definition of intelligence and for specific actions that only god could have performed. Surely, you aren't trying to say that predicting there will be wars in the middle east is a god-originated miracle?

One other point that you seem to be illustrating very well spidey is the idea of interpretation. You have posted quite a few examples of where other people / religions have misinterpreted the bible. Wouldn't a real god want to correct the record? If God really was against any kind of birth control, even in the face of HIV infections, why hasn't he unambiguously stated that so that the whole world knows?

The problem is that each religion believes they have a monopoly on the true, but each interprets what they think the truth is and so we have people flying planes into buildings on one hand and here in America we have people fired from jobs because someone was "living in sin" with their boyfriend.

Show me the money or in this case, show me the evidence that there's anybody up there.

To Hilal Al-Ismaily:
The eye is a perfect example of evolution. Starting with the lowly flatworm whose eye is not very along the evolutionary trail. The flat worm is able to detect and react to light, but can't really see in the same way we can. The flat worm never developed a lense or a pupil, but it can respond to light and presumably that's all it needed to do in order to survive for millions of years.

If you look at the human eye, it's a perfect example of evolution. You would never have designed the eye the way it is because the lense is in the wrong place and the image that comes through the eye is actually upside down and backwards. It required the brain to present the image properly in order for it to work.

If an intelligent designer had designed the human eye, he would have to be accused of making extra work -- both for the eye and the brain -- by building this overly complicated structure that still didn't work correctly without adjustments from the brain. Maybe we should sue God for padding his bill.

There are examples of eyes all along the evolutionary trail and guess what, man's eyes are not neccessarily the best. Fully 90% of people will eventually need eyeglasses. Doesn't that sound like a design flaw by the great creator?

The purity of the Bible is hidden in its metaphors. Many false religions take it very literal that is why they end up as idiots. One example is the bread as the body of Christ. The bread he was referring to was His Words and not the bread that they were eating during that last supper.

Where did that holy water came from? It also came from a literal interpretation of water baptism. Christ used water to signify the Holy Spirit. As the water washes out dirt, the Holy Spirit purifies a sinful soul. There is no such thing as holy water. Catholics can't distinguish a metaphor from literal words.

Why am I accused of being an extremist for saying the truth? It's reminiscent of what Lot was accused of when he warned the people that God will burn Sodom in due time.

Susan Jacoby claims that the catholic belief on the Pope’s infallibility accelerated her leaving the church. I find it very peculiar that she would find this to be so important. It would be nice if she could cite a single instance in which the Pope has “used” his infallibility during the last century.

The percentage of Catholic priests who've ever been accused of pedophilia is actually *NO HIGHER* than the percentage of clergy in other faiths and in fact is *LOWER* than the percentage in other similar "helping" professions such as teachers. Yet because so many journalists are bitter ex-Catholics with a personal grudge against the Church like Ms. Jacoby, one would think that it was a problem specific to Catholicism.

Yes, there have been a few "bad apple" priests. Yes, it's horrendous that certain members of the hierarchy such as Cardinal Law shuttled them around from parish to parish for years. But it's wrong to blame Catholicism for the evil deeds of a small number of men.

Canyon Shearer (also known as Spiderman2)'s more extreme posts are reminiscent of the anti-papist, No Popery! 'welcome' the migrants received. Of course, for the Irish at least they were nothing new, and the more vitriolic the taunts the more fervently Catholic they became. Only when things calmed down and Catholics were accepted into Am.society did we see large numbers abandoning the faith.

Again, very same phenomena in the UK, except, of course, for Northern Ireland which has the highest number of church-going Catholics in the UK, well, in Europe probable, except for Poland.

It will be interesting to see what happens to American Latinos, I will be interested in Prof Stevens-Arroyo's piece.

I've never had any respect for two faced extremely confused people. The writer is one of soooo many. Additionally, it is clear after so many ignorant and abusive items by Sally Quinn (hey nice photo Sally, It's better than your writing) as they say 'more's the pity'. The Post would never talk about other groups the way catholics are talked about.

PV

Re: "Inerrancy of the Bible"--Catholics do not insist that every word in the Bible is the perfect truth. I think you're mixing up Catholics with Evangelicals who insist on 'sola scriptura' (which is *not* in the Bible).

J

Well, you're a Protestant kind of Muslim, that's for sure. Anyway, this Catholic 'loves' the vestments. It's for the greater glory of God nothing much to do with the priest. Away from the altar they're as dull as peahens. (At the altar, they're peacocks.)

As an atheist, you should not be writing any article on Catholics or religion.

That would tantamount to having Hitler write about the Jewish upbringing.

In Mark Twain's words: reports of my death are greatly exagerated.

As is American Catholicism--its death and otherwise! American Catholicism was never indigenous, always the religion of immigrants, whose coming often precipitated sectarian riots . As the immigrants assimilated, many of them gave up the religion of their parents and grandparents.2nd and 3rd generation Catholic migrants also copied the birth rates (lower), divorce rates (higher), and education preference (secular) of the host country.

Nothing very stange about any of it. Same thing happened with Irish migrants into England, well, technically in early days, it was supposed to be the same country but nobody ever really believed that, especially the Irish.

The title of Ms. Jacoby's tome is:

"Pope Benedict and American Catholicism: on the Titantic's deck."

Ms. Jacoby joins the pantheon of intellectuals who have been predicting the demise (like the Titantic) of the Catholic church (be it the American or worldwide Catholic church) for the past 2,000 years.

Unlike the Titantic, the Catholic church will be here until the end of times. Like any large institution, it will experience ups and downs, highs and lows.

The Catholic church and its rich, rich traditions will survive its current foibles as it did when Christians were being fed to lions; the Eastern schism of the 1100's or the Protestant reformation.

Ms. Jacoby, your grade school Nun was correct ..... "Once a (true) Catholic, always a (true) Catholic."

Dear Ms. Jacoby,

I am one of those people who have been censored several time in different On Faith discussions. I assure you that nothing--absolutely nothing--in my comments violated by one iota the standards you stated in your addendum to your piece on the Pope's visit. There were no personal attacks, no obscenity, no vulgarity. Nothing but an attempt at rational analysis. I am sending you via e-mail one of the complaints I sent to the WP about this censorship. It includes my original comment that never got posted. This complaint was not only sent to the listed addresee. It was sent to the Ombudsman and to every e-mail address of editors I found under "Contact." None of them deigned to reply. I have sent other complaints about the censorship on On Faith, with the same results.

The Washington Post's lack of integrity is not only shown by the act of censorship. It is even more cogently driven home by the fact that the Washington Post feels absolutely no obligation to respond to a complaint about the censorship. Let me make it clear: When submitting complaints, I have specifically included copies of my censored comments and asked for a ruling on how they violated Post's standards. No response.

My comments to the On Faith blog have been censored several times just because someone did not like what I said.

You may be unaware, Ms. Jacoby, of the degree of dishonesty and contempt for readers that now permeates the Washington Post. I assure you that people are being censored for no other reason than someone does not like their comments. Your are gravely mistaken to conclude that the censorship was justified because the content violated the stated standards for posting. I have no idea, of course, at what level this censorship occurs. It is not clear, for example, what you mean by the phrase "owner of a blog." Are you referring to On Faith as a whole, or just yours?

Regarding your statement that "...there is no absolute right on any blog to have one's comments published in toto, The final say always belongs to the owner of a blog." I don't think you recognize the full implications of that statement. It does not just give you the right to censor unacceptable content. It gives you the right to censorship in the most naked meaning of that term. I would hope that you would at least recognize the right of a censored person to have any complaint about uncalled-for censorship to be adjudicated by an impartial party.

PV:

Not that I'm a supporter of the Catholic hierarchy, Catholicism, or Benedict but participation in the Hitler Youth was mandatory for almost all Germans under Hitler's rule, so it isn't particularly useful to condemn him for that.

Bad dressing now, eh "J"? OK I got a big chuckle out of that.

Infallibility of the Pope (A former Hitler Youth?!?) and Innerrancy of the Bible are two of the most dangerous, ignorant concepts that Christians have come up with.

I've lost respect.

-once a Catholic

(They never really apologized for Institutionalizing Child Molesting, did they?)

Yonkers, New York
14 April 2008

Catholicism in America and the advanced countries of Europe is doomed to extinction. It is bound to go the way of the dodo!

That eventuality is only a question of time--and for it time is running short.

Why?

It is not only the sexual scandals that have led Catholics to question the validity of their religious faith and led them to turn their backs on it in droves; this is only a small part of the debacle.

The fact of the matter is that Catholicism, with its whole edifice of dogmas, principles, teachings, strictures and values, cannot withstand the onslaught of reason and enlightenment which are the hallmarks of truly educated, civilized and enlightened societies.

Catholicism, which is just another religion, is at bottom founded on men's ignorance, fears and wishes and myths
.
As a religion, in time it loses its hold on men as men get past their ignorance and their fears of the supernatural through their inherent power of reason.

Mariano Patalinjug
MarPatalinjug@aol.com

Susan Jacoby

Your claim to be a rational person and at the same time an atheist is contradictory.
An atheist can never be a rational person. How a rational person can claim that there is no creator who created this complex life system? Think of how an eye functions or a brain or a heart. All these organs started as a single cell. Who controlled the cell division process? The only rational answer is that there is a wisdom and a design behind this process and not a blind force of nature. That is God Almighty. Who can not be fully grasped by mortals with limited faculties. But can be acknowledged and believed by his signs in nature.

Ms. Jacoby:

You have taken the words out of my mouth. I agree with you. When will the tide turn?

Spiderman2 aka Canyon Shearer et al,

Again:

What "voodooer of the hoodoo" blessed you with such stupidity in the field of fortune telling and interpretations of said stupidity???

Interesting, Spiderman.

And if a whole bunch of different people kept irrationally-hurting you in the name of a book, how many more people would you let tell you you're evil and bad and damned for not believing them? Or that the book is a magic font of goodness?

Those who would like to meet the pope when he visits America are as insane as the pope himself. That's how foolish this world has become. They are welcoming the devil's representative. Never did a pope represented Christ and those who thinks he does are plainly duped or hoodwinked.

i appreciate "Weekly Schedule", "Projects" and "Resources&Links" partitions.

Someone wrote "I would also like to know that if a person comes to you and say that he is the Christ come back to redeem the earth would you like to fall to his feets and accept him as your personal saviour ? "

If I have the authority, I would put him in a mental asylum. The same thing I would do to the pope if I have the authority.

Let them be sane first before they are allowed to be let loose.

the front page of OnFaith has been changed "for the visitor",

and the rooms of the authors are how they are, not changed.

Quoting “Why couldn't he simply have written it so that it was understandable to all?”

O come, let us worship and bow down: let us kneel before the Lord our maker.
For he is our God; and we are the people of his pasture, and the sheep of his hand. To day if ye will hear his voice,
Harden not your heart, as in the provocation, and as in the day of temptation in the wilderness:
When your fathers tempted me, proved me, and saw my work.
Forty years long was I grieved with this generation, and said, It is a people that do err in their heart, and they have not known my ways:
Unto whom I sware in my wrath that they should not enter into my rest.

Do you see “the sheep of his hand. To day if ye will hear his voice” “Harden not your heart” “I sware in my wrath that they should not enter into my rest” Jews have their Sabbath to the LORD (rest), the sheep have their sabbath to their god, “For the Son of man is Lord even of the sabbath day.” “And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature.” “the sheep of his hand preach the gospel to every creature.”

But those that encamp before the tabernacle toward the east, even before the tabernacle of the congregation eastward, shall be Moses, and Aaron and his sons, keeping the charge of the sanctuary for the charge of the children of Israel; and the stranger that cometh nigh shall be put to death.

Look “Moses, and Aaron and his sons, keeping the charge of the sanctuary for the charge of the children of Israel; and the stranger that cometh nigh shall be put to death.” “I sware in my wrath that they should not enter into my rest”

Ye shall keep my sabbaths, and reverence my sanctuary: I am the Lord.

Then wrought Bezaleel and Aholiab, and every wise hearted man, in whom the Lord put wisdom and understanding to know how to work all manner of work for the service of the sanctuary, according to all that the Lord had commanded.

Look “the Lord put wisdom and understanding to know how to work all manner of work for the service of the sanctuary, according to all that the Lord had commanded.”
Do you know what CHOSEN means. “let us worship and bow down: let us kneel before the Lord our maker” “Ye shall keep my Sabbaths, and reverence my sanctuary: I am the Lord.”

And there came two angels to Sodom at even; and Lot sat in the gate of Sodom: and Lot seeing them rose up to meet them; and he bowed himself with his face toward the ground;

Is the holy spirit supposed to surround us as we read it and make us understand?
the sheep have their sabbath to their god, “For the Son of man is Lord even of the sabbath day.” “Lot sat in the gate of Sodom” “But he that entereth in by the door is the shepherd of the sheep.” “and Lot seeing them rose up” Christ has risen “the beasts of the field and the fowls of the heaven hath he given into thine hand, and hath made thee ruler over them All”

This is the dream; and we will tell the interpretation thereof before the king.
Thou, O king, art a king of kings: for the God of heaven hath given thee a kingdom, power, and strength, and glory.
And wheresoever the children of men dwell, the beasts of the field and the fowls of the heaven hath he given into thine hand, and hath made thee ruler over them All. Thou art this head of gold.

For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory
hath given thee a kingdom, power, and strength, and glory.
the beasts of the field and the fowls of the heaven hath he given into thine hand, and hath made thee ruler over them All.

For the same reason why there isn't a single event that can unambiguously attributed to God.

“Unto whom I sware in my wrath that they should not enter into my rest.”
“Moses, and Aaron and his sons, keeping the charge of the sanctuary for the charge of the children of Israel; and the stranger that cometh nigh shall be put to death.”

I sware in my wrath
Kiss the son, lest he be angry, and ye perish from the way, when his wrath is kindled but a little. Blessed are all they that put their trust in him.

“For the Son of man is Lord even of the sabbath day.”
“Lot sat in the gate of Sodom” “But he that entereth in by the door is the shepherd of the sheep.” “and Lot seeing them rose up”

sorry guys, I had a real hard time posting. Thanks to jovevz for his stupidity posting trash.

abee,

The purity of the Bible is hidden in its metaphors. Many false religions take it very literal that is why they end up as idiots. One example is the bread as the body of Christ. The bread he was referring to was His Words and not the bread that they were eating during that last supper.

Where did that holy water came from? It also came from a literal interpretation of water baptism. Christ used water to signify the Holy Spirit. As the water washes out dirt, the Holy Spirit purifies a sinful soul. There is no such thing as holy water. Catholics can't distinguish a metaphor from literal words.

As water washes out dirt,

Well, I dunno about Ms jacoby, really, but apart from feeling a bit more entitled to nitpick on account of still being claimed by them as member, well, I like to think that on an intellectual basis, I treat Catholicism much as any other.

If there's any animus involved, sorry, it's only cause it's personal.

the Holy Spirit purifies a sinful soul.

Where did that holy water came from? It also came from a literal interpretation of water bap-tism. Christ used water to signify the Holy Spirit.

Holy Spirit

abee,

The purity of the Bible is hidden in its metaphors. Many false religions take it very literal that is why they end up as idiots. One example is the bread as the body of Christ. The bread he was referring to was His Words and not the bread that they were eating during that last supper.

Where did that holy water came from?

Spiderman2
"Nothing can create something more intelligent than itself and that's a fact. Show me a science that can debunk that. There is none."

So as you are a Christian I believe that you should believe that GOD is the most intelligent being in the whole universe. Now as you said in this line all of us are created in GOD's image and there by as the best creation of GOD , human have the same intelligence of GOD.So spiderman2 do you want to say that all of us are GOD? I guess that can be qualified as blasphemy against GOD.
Bye the bye I would also like to know that if a person comes to you and say that he is the Christ come back to redeem the earth would you like to fall to his feets and accept him as your personal saviour ?

For the "upteenth" time:

Spiderman2 aka Bible Thumper, Fortune Teller and Severely Brainwashed in that Old Time Religion,

Fools are those who have read only the bible. God cannot be proud of such lazy creations!!!!

To reiterate:

What "voodooer of the hoodoo" blessed you with such stupidity in the field of fortune telling and interpretations of said stupidity???

abee,

The purity of the Bible is hidden in its metaphors. Many false religions take it very literal that is why they end up as idiots. One example is the bread as the body of Christ. The bread he was referring to was His Words and not the bread that they were eating during that last supper.

it's getting harder to post. it's being censored. thanks to that idiot space ship wack* named jovezs. What is in mormonism that makes you such a stupid person?

Spiderman 2:

You say computers are dumb as a rock. I agree, but you might say the same of men. Look around at violence and environment pollution and poverty - man is indeed dumb as a rock.

Man created God, that is why he (I presume some 90% of believers still feel God is a he) behaves so strangely. He kills babies, allows rapes and dictators, sends tornados. In one Bible verse he tells us to turn the other cheek, in another he tells us to kill our children if they misbehave. If we were to take the Bible literally, we wouldn't be able to function, because it contradicts itself all the way, except for God's childish wish to be worshipped whatever he does.

I liked this article, because it is open and free and maybe based on disappoinment, but not on hatefulness. I also like quite a few of the very intelligent comments trying to explain evolution and more.

Former Christian,

Computers are intelligent devices but not as intelligent as man. All of them are still dumb. Their kind of intelligence revolves around equations formed by man. Once it's outside that equation, they become dumb as a rock. Ask a rock or any computer what do they think of themselves? What you would get is a blank stare unless the programmer pre-programmed that.

I could live with a bit more "censorship" here, actually. Scrolling past the long, rambling, and off-topic ranting of the street-corner evangelists becomes tedious.

By the way, clerical pedophilia is nothing new. Not for nothing did Voltaire call the Jesuits the Reverend Buggers.

Why do you place your faith in man? God is bigger than "religion." Do not be fooled by people who try to put God in a box.

Former Christian,

One example is the war in Iraq and Afghanistan. Those two wars were accurately predicted by the Bible. Another war is coming of similar magnitude. And another of a bigger magnitude. And another which the U.S. won't be able to handle. And another which will establish the U.S as the King of the Hill for many years to come.

They are all in the Bible and it's a scary thing to think that all you guys (atheists and practitioners of false religions) will face Someone who doesn't lie like burning souls forever if they don't believe.

Gandhi was opposed to contraception.
Liberals always love Gandhi, but he was against their most favorite invention of the 20th century.

Right on, Jim!

And isn't it ironic that Susan "Jacobin" Jacoby is the author of a book that chronicles anti-rationalism in America - she covers the symptoms but not the roots of the problem.

Spiderman2 said:

Nothing can create something more intelligent than itself and that's a fact. Show me a science that can debunk that. There is none.

I guess it depends upon your definition of intelligence. Surely today's computers answer questions far faster that any man. They have better memories -- both longer and higher capacity.

So what exactly do you mean when you say intelligent?

Christians have always beleived that the world is rational. It is belief in God as the rational creator that provided the context in which science made real progress in understanding the world.
The author says that the truth cannot be known.
If this attitude is taken too far we will end up with a radical scepticism that makes all rational inquiry pointless.

DB wrote : " How about Einstein's parents? "

Albert Einsteins' parents did not create Albert's brain. They don't even have a clue what made Albert intellectually superior to them and others. Wrong analogy.

To Spiderman,

I anxiously await your example.

The Bernoulli effect was the term used to describe the cause of the read/write head to float above the disk (because of its shape) of the first removal disk called a Bernoulli Box.

To Haz:

I don't understand the point of your post. Are you just selecting sections from the bible? And to what end? Is the holy spirit supposed to surround us as we read it and make us understand?

I'll give you an example of evidence for god -- If he had really written the bible and he wanted his people to know how to live by reading the bible, a sure sign that God wrote it would be that anyone who desired to read it, could. It wouldn't matter what language you spoke or whether you could read, the holy spirit would help you and you could read it.

But that didn't happen. In fact, the bible wasn't translated into a common language (German) until Martin Luther came along. So mankind had to wait a couple of thousand years to be able to read God's writing?

Why couldn't he simply have written it so that it was understandable to all? For the same reason why there isn't a single event that can unambiguously attributed to God.

Ms. Jacoby,

Unfortunately, I have to agree with another that you do protest too much. You think you know far more than you do about other religions, and use, too frequently, "examples" from them. These religions are not the particulars of your lapsed Catholic universal.

You speak, for example, of ultra-right wing Orthodox Jews, mired in 17th century thinking. There is a Union of Orthodox Jews. Which ones are you thinking of?

I recall your having used very offensive language, at least offensive to me (an atheist) regarding Orthodox Jewish women, that resulted in a post regarding the Catholic Church's position on abortion, among other things. The reply, I thought, was well deserved.

Your indirect response was to reveal that your father had been Jewish (until his conversion later in life), that he kept this a secret, that when he revealed it, his anxieties turned out to have been ill founded. (I'd go back to the archives, but, frankly, I haven't the time, right now.)

Well, well, well! So all this antisemitism that we Jews experience daily in New York, that we read in the comments, must all be evidence of good old-fashioned American tolerance! Your father must have been suffering from a psychological problem, then, not from knowledge of history, of the world in which he lived?

I agree with you that hate-speech is intolerable, and your speech was not. Nor was the reply you received. However, you were far too provocative, and a reply in kind was only to be expected.

It is always best to begin with one's own house or a house in which one has lived for many years. One knows it. There are many Catholics who have called for the revision of the New(sic) testament, Protestants as well. Why? Because they believe it promotes antisemitism (Langmuir, Haynes, Ruether, et al). Will you address yourself to that? To the Catholic Catechism?

And when will you be speaking of the Church's medievalism? It's constant interference in the affairs of this and other nations?

Know something of the religions of which you speak before you speak of them. You will be more credible. Secularism, by the way, and I am a secularist, doesn't have to be oppositional or polemical.

By the way, I noticed you didn't include Muslims, in your list. Any particular reason why not?

Former Christian wrote : "Give me one example of an action or event that's occurred in recorded history that can only be attributed to God."

There a few I know and very accurate. Just hang in there coz there will be more that I will reveal when the time is ripe. By the way, I study evolution but I'm not convinced. Some are scientific but many are just plain stupidity.

I also happen to study Bernoulli principle and tested it in the lab. But I never came across with Bournilli effect. (I don't wish to insult you but I need to,just to prove a point)

To Catullus and ponderer,

Susan may be guilty of many things -- applying too much reason and too much common sense -- but bashing Catholics is not one of them.

She is critical of all religions and pointing out demographics that seem to indicate a decline in that religion over that last 30 years is backed up by US census data.

My good friend who is a strong Catholic confirms many of these statistics. His church went from 5 full-time priests 30 years ago when he moved into this town in NJ where he lives, to one priest now.

Andrew, you are absolutely right. I raised three boys "in the church" so to speak, until reasoning won out. The problem with all religions is that it requires that people accept preposterous ideas without question and without reason. And that leads to husbands killing their wives because they were not virgin (honor killings) and prevents Catholic charities from doing the one thing that would prevent the next generation of orphans -- give out condoms. All because their religions leaders have declared that nothing should be done to thwart God's will when it comes to reproduction.

Of course that doesn't say much for the creator of the universe if his will can be thwarted by a $.25 condom.

spiderman2:

Nothing can create something more intelligent than itself and that's a fact. Show me a science that can debunk that. There is none.

How about Einstein's parents?

Oh there "Reality Challenged" and Obfuscating Jihadist

It is very strange that whereas you know and comment so much about the Christian religions and their flaws, the USA and its flaws and the general non-Muslim world and its flaws, you rarely mention the flaws of Islam.

For example, the Sunni and Shiite blood feud for the last 800 years is a flaw terrorizing not only Islam but the world in general. It is obvious that Sunnis (e.g. you) consider Shiites to be a lower class race of hominids who should not be allowed to exist.

From CNN:

"Al-Sistani was apparently referring to Abdullah bin Jabrain, a key member of Saudi Arabia's clerical establishment, who last month joined a chorus of other senior figures from the hardline Wahhabi school of Sunni Islam that regards Shiites as infidels.

Bin Jabrain described Shiites as "the most vicious enemy of Muslims."

Very strong words but you remain silent about such rhetoric??

This Sunni-Shiite blood feud/hatred/ genocide/terror continue to spread globally as noted before and below:

Iraq's civil war- Sunni minority, Shiite majority, 24/7 blood letting, 4000 American soldiers dead, 90,000 Iraqi civilians, dead.

Iran, Shiite theocracy, 24/7 support of global terror.

OBL, Sunni/"Wannabee"/Saudi madman and madmen, 24/7 support of global terror.

Fill in the answers below:

Hamas, Sunni or Shiite??

Fatah, Sunni or Shiite??

Pakistan, Sunni or Shiite?

Which group assassinated Bhutto??

Malaysia, nearing a Sunni theocracy?

Bahrain, Sunni or Shiite???

Phillipines, Sunni or Shiite???

Taliban, Sunni or Shiite???

Somalia, Sunni or Shiite???

We await your condemnation of said blood feud and its hate by your commentaries on this blog, in your mosque, in your city and country, with your imams/clerics and on every Islamic blog on the internet. Or do you still fear the dictates of the long-dead, mad Arab named Mohammed?????

To Spiderman,

There is a big difference between "just a theory" and a theory in the scientific sense. The latter is one backed by evidence, documented in scientific journals and able to withstand review and criticism by other scientists. Our understanding of gravity is another theory whose evidence is overwhelming.

The same can be said for evolution. I'm sure you understand mutation and the fact that genes sometimes fail to accurately replicate themselves. When some of these copying errors result in a change -- usually this change is very small -- and that change provides survival advantages to that organism, then the probabilithy that that organism will survive long enough to breed increases, thus increasing the posibility of passing along the mutation.

It seems perfectly logical that these small changes, over hundreds of thousands of years, will result in substantially different organisms from the orignal. And the evidence for this is all around us from antibiotic resistent bacteria to wolves and dogs.

Wolves and dogs share a common ancestor and one look at certain breeds of dogs would lead you to conclude that they are very similar. You can artificically inseminate a wolf with dog sperm and produce a hybrid. They are still capable of breeding but no longer do so because of their instinct which is another product of evolution. Speciation occurs when a descendent organization either no longer can breed or instinctively chooses not to breed.

Of course, you can follow the easy way out and say everything needs evidence but God. But just like I'm pretty sure you believe in most scientific theories -- like the Bournilli effect which is the theory as to why airplanes and jets gain lift on wings and allow them to fly. Or, the theories involved with the characteristics of light -- which you use when you listen to music on a CD. You are in effect believing in many of the properties of light (which are still theories) but are used in burning and reading CD's, DVD's and to land rovers on Mars. (How else could we determine how far away and in which direction in 3 dimensions Mars is if we didn't understand the properties of light?)

Yet, when it comes to evolution you seem to dismiss over 100 years of evidence. You don't seem to understand that we have organs in our body that no longer serve any real purpose but are left over from our ancestor organisms.

It's real easy to attribute things to God or to Satan, so long as you don't feel the need to support it with evidence. Give me one example of an action or event that's occurred in recorded history that can only be attributed to God.

Here's the sp*ceship wack* again, Jovez. The reason why oftentimes our comments get blocked is because of this person.

Mormonism, what's in this religion that made Jovez this way?

Susan doth protest too much about her lack of animus toward Catholicism. She's just a Catholic-basher, which is perfectly fine. Just don't bash other religions (e.g., Judaism, Islam) or the PC police will come knocking.

JAC,

The three Bs: Born, Breed and Brainwashed are characteristics of all false religion followers. Nice try but it doesn't fit me. I have only one master and He's not human. Now who's to brainwash me then if I have no "human idol" ?

Nothing can create something more intelligent than itself and that's a fact. Show me a science that can debunk that. There is none.

You are proof that anti-Catholicism is the last acceptable bias.

Your commentary is petty, personal, disrespectful, and biased.

You show me nothing that would argue that your thoughts or opinions are worth considering.

oh jezus maria susan dear you are so right. this foolish pope in his drag outfit should be the laughing stock this cumming week.
he is proof that religion poisons everything it touches! who would ever think that a man who was in the nazi hitler jugend would be allowed into our country in full drag. what a scam what a fraud!

Generally a good article but Ms. Jacoby misunderstands the doctrine of papal infallibiliy. Check out the "ex cathedra" part of the doctrine. I think it was last used over 100 years ago. The rhetoric may sound "ex cathedra", even from a parish pulpit, but it's not.

Just a Comment,

Eckhart Tolle author of "A New Earth" wrote "Man made god in his own image. The eternal, the infinite, the un-nameable was reduced to a mental idol that you must believe in and worship as my god or our god. "

It's clear the man is lost and don't have a personal experience of the True God. "I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life. No man cometh unto the Father but by Me." (Jn 14:6)

He had searched MANY WAYS but sadly, he wasn't succesful to find the the Only Way.

Ask Eckhart what is the near future or the big events coming soon. Im 100 percent sure he doesn't know but I know. The main difference is that I found the true God ,but clearly, he did NOT.

Ah, it's deja vu all over again.

Spiderman2 (love that username) and Dan: SM2 points out that there are more false religions than true ones. Dan offers Pascal's Wager, which says we have nothing to lose by believing, just in case. But that's the rub! How do we tell the true from the false? Which religion do we believe "just in case"? "What if we picked the wrong religion, Marge? Each time we go to church, we're making God madder and madder!" Homer Simpson said it best! Please give him some advice.

SM2 also said that since we don't know what created the universe and the brain, it must be God. But that is the Argument from Ignorance or God of the Gaps. People used to say that there is no explanation for lightning, earthquakes or disease, so it must be God. But now we know about meteorology, seismology and microbiology, so we have no need for Jupiter, Pele or Shiva. The Big Bang is just another "gap"--odds are, the universe and the brain were created by more facets of nature, not an imaginary sky-being.

A time to love, and a time to hate; a time of war, and a time of peace.

These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the Lord made the earth and the heavens,

And when Abram was ninety years old and nine, the Lord appeared to Abram, and said unto him, I am the Almighty God; walk before me, and be thou perfect.

And God Almighty bless thee, and make thee fruitful, and multiply thee, that thou mayest be a multitude of people;

Even by the God of thy father, who shall help thee; and by the Almighty, who shall bless thee with blessings of heaven above, blessings of the deep that lieth under, blessings of the breasts, and of the womb:

And all the souls that came out of the loins of Jacob were seventy souls: for Joseph was in Egypt already.

The blessings of thy father have prevailed above the blessings of my progenitors unto the utmost bound of the everlasting hills: they shall be on the head of Joseph, and on the crown of the head of him that was separate from his brethren.

Ye that love the Lord, hate evil: he preserveth the souls of his saints; he delivereth them out of the hand of the wicked.

The fear of the Lord is to hate evil: pride, and arrogancy, and the evil way, and the froward mouth, do I hate.

Ye that love the Lord, hate evil
I am the Almighty God
A time to love- Almighty
a time to hate- God

The fear of the Lord is to hate evil
Almighty God
a time of war-The fear of the Lord- Almighty
a time of peace-to hate evil- God

by the Almighty
shall bless thee with blessings of heaven above
blessings of the deep that lieth under
blessings of the breasts- the day that the Lord made the earth
and of the womb- all the souls that came out of the loins of Jacob

For the Lord's portion is his people; Jacob is the lot of his inheritance.

God Almighty(mother) For the Lord's portion is his people (father)Almighty God

Who knoweth the spirit of man that goeth upward, and the spirit of the beast that goeth downward to the earth?

the spirit of man that goeth upward

the Lord made the earth and the heavens
The fear of the Lord-Almighty(mother)
For the Lord's portion is his people
Ye that love the Lord-(father)Almighty

To him that made great lights: for his mercy endureth for ever:
The sun to rule by day: for his mercy endureth for ever:
The moon and stars to rule by night: for his mercy endureth for ever.

To him that made great lights
Blessed are the meek: for they shall inherit the earth.

great- The sun to rule by day
The sun to rule by day
And he shall be thy spokesman unto the people: and he shall be, even he shall be to thee instead of a mouth, and thou shalt be to him instead of God.
And the Lord said to Aaron, Go into the wilderness to meet Moses. And he went, and met him in the mount of God, and kissed him.
The sun to rule by day: for his mercy endureth for ever:

greater- The moon and stars to rule by night
Star out of Jacob
his younger brother shall be greater than he
David king over all Israel: and all the rest also of Israel were of one heart to make David king.
The moon and stars to rule by night: for his mercy endureth for ever.

greater- The moon and stars to rule by night
great- The sun to rule by day

shall be on the head of Joseph

For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.

Who knoweth the spirit of man that goeth upward, and the spirit of the beast that goeth downward to the earth?

the spirit of the beast that goeth downward to the earth

In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also.

Ye are the salt of the earth: but if the salt have lost his savour, wherewith shall it be salted? it is thenceforth good for nothing, but to be cast out, and to be trodden under foot of men. Ye are the light of the world. A city that is set on an hill cannot be hid.

the greater light to rule the day- ye shall be as gods, knowing good
Ye are the salt of the earth
the light of the world

The people which sat in darkness saw great light; and to them which sat in the region and shadow of death light is sprung up.

and the lesser light to rule the night- ye shall be as gods, knowing evil
people which sat in darkness saw great light
shadow of death light is sprung up

But when Jesus heard it, he answered him, saying, Fear not: believe only, and she shall be made whole.

the spirit of the beast that goeth downward to the earth

Almighty God- the children of the beast -God Almighty
God- Fear not (EVIL)
the children of the beast
God- believe only (GOOD)

And the Lord God said unto the serpent, Because thou hast done this, thou art cursed above all cattle, and above every beast of the field; upon thy belly shalt thou go, and dust shalt thou eat all the days of thy life:

And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil: For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, for ever.

This is the dream; and we will tell the interpretation thereof before the king.
Thou, O king, art a king of kings: for the God of heaven hath given thee a kingdom, power, and strength, and glory.
And wheresoever the children of men dwell, the beasts of the field and the fowls of the heaven hath he given into thine hand, and hath made thee ruler over them All. Thou art this head of gold.

For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory
hath given thee a kingdom, power, and strength, and glory.
the beasts of the field and the fowls of the heaven hath he given into thine hand, and hath made thee ruler over them All.

Thou art this head of gold

fool !!!

To spiderman2:

To clearly understand the CODED MESSAGES left by a supposed god, you don't need intelligence, you need the three Bs: Born, Breed and Brainwashed in a particular code interpretation. And after that the requirement is to stop being rational about things of faith and no-faith.

I don't know what is your definition of your god, but if you say that he "dropped some CODED words before and after He left" your definition do not include omnipresent, since by definition something omnipresent can't leave and come back.

But this is an small glitch as compared with the coded message interpretation business.

Peace and best wishes to all.

JAC

Jed Rothwell,

Nothing can create something more intelligent than itself and that's a fact. Evolution is just a theory and never a fact. DNA does not allow one specie to become another specie. It's out of its range. That AIDS virus or any mutating bacteria would never become a tiger if you observe it day and night for a trillion years.

The devil is a very cunning creature.
Evolutionists, Catholics, Atheists don't know that they are fighting for and serving for the same master. The devil is your master but you don't have a clue.

More than a few comments have projected onto Susan a need to believe in God when she dies. In fact, research in hospice care has shown that atheists are less afraid of death, less distraught at its approach, and more peaceful at their ends. Is it surprising that religion fails to fulfill its promise - yet again?

Dan's idea that belief is "a safe bet" for the dying calls into question our limiting ourselves to what's du jour. Wouldn't it be safer to believe in the ancient Greek, Norse, Hindu, and Roman Gods - plus the devil, too? Ah, but the lord God is a jealous God. So YOU say.

At some point, the rational mind rebels against the manipulative case for nonsense.

Ms Jacoby looks young and healthy at an age when it is the thing to do to go against one's upbringing and strike out on one's own with forthright intellectual honesty. I'd like to be a fly on the wallpaper of her psyche when she is seriously confronted with her mortality and/or a decline in her good looks and position. Even if there were no existing organized religions left on the planet, we would invent one. In the darkness of terminal illness, intractable pain, death, disease and suffering often those who have left their faith return in a heartbeat. I know. I've been there and done that.

I like this article. More balanced and thoughtful. Less one-sided than many other articles in this section.

Another one of the many stupidity Catholicism believes.

The Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary

" The Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary is the Catholic belief that 'the Immaculate Mother of God, Mary ever virgin, when the course of her earthly life was finished, was taken up (assumed) body and soul into heavenly glory.' This definition of Pope Pius XII (1950), which crystallizes what the church has always held whether implicitly or explicitly, likewise indicates the scriptural basis and theological reasons of the doctrine: since God in choosing Mary to be the mother of Christ had preserved her from original sin (Immaculate Conception) and had kept her a virgin even in her motherhood, it was fitting that He grant her final victory over death by freeing her body from all corruption and bringing it together with her soul to the glory of heaven. Testimony to the universal belief in this doctrine can be traced to early Christian (Catholic) times. The feast, on August 15, certainly antedates the decree of the Byzantine Emperor Maurice (582-602) that it be celebrated throughout his empire. "

Rebuttal :

First, there is no scriptural record that Mary ascended to heaven. In the Bible, there were only three people who ascended bodily to heaven. They were Enoch (Genesis 5:24), Elijah (II Kings 2:11) and Jesus Christ (Acts 1:9)

Second , the scripture says that after the virgin birth of Jesus, Mary bore at least 6 more children ( Matthew 13:55-56). She certainly did not remain a virgin.

Third, about claims that Mary was sinless, let us hear what the apostles John and Paul had said :

I John 1:8 " If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselfves, and the truth is not in us. "

Romans 3:23 " For all have sinned and come short of the glory of God."

Even before these false teachings appeared , God already knew this coming. In Revelation 2:2 , we can read His prophetic verse, " I know thy works, and thy labor, and thy patience, and how thou canst not bear them which are evil : and thou hast tried (or tested) them who say they are apostles (RC's creed of apostolic succesion), but are not, and hast found them LIARS. "

Ellen R Mooney - please don't assume that Susan is bitter because of her atheism. I used to be catholic too and am now an atheist and don't feel bitter at all - even towards the catholic church.

I have fond memories or the rituals and customs. I left because of lack of belief in an invisible supernatural being and a whole raft of unsubstantiated stories.

No prayers are needed. I understand that prayer comforts you, but I don't think it makes any real difference and I doubt Susan does either.

One of the many stupid catholic doctrines.

Immaculate Conception

" This is a Roman Catholic teaching which, according to the definition (1854) of Pope Pius IX, maintains that " the most blessed Virgin Mary, in the first instant of her conception, was, by the singular grace and privilege of Almighty God, through the foreseen merits of Christ Jesus the Saviour of mankind, preserved immune from all stain of original sin." The doctrine concerns Mary's conception in her mother's womb, and is not to be confused with the virginal conception and birth of Christ. "

Rebuttal :

Simply put, Immaculate Conception is a Roman Catholic belief thru the declaration of Pope Pius IX that Mary was conceived sinless from her mother's womb and immune from sin throughout her earthly life.

This declaration of course has no scriptural backing. Not only does it contradicts the teachings of the apostles and the prophets, it also contradicts the words of Mary herself. In Luke 1:46-47, it says " And Mary said, my soul doth magnify the Lord and my spirit hath rejoiced in God my Saviour".

All sinners need a Savior and Mary is no exception, otherwise, she would not call God as her Savior.

Concerning this kind of doctrines which has no biblical support, let us hear what God had said : "Howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men " (Mark 7:7 ).

Today, billions of people around the world are worshipping God in vain because they follow false doctrines which are purely commandments of some "holy" people.

A century ago, Jose Rizal (the Philippine national hero), warned his people from one of these false churches and its false teachings particularly the nation's practiced religion (Catholicism). Once again let's be reminded of what he said : " The wild man from the hills, if clad in a priest's robe, remains a hillman and can only deceive the weak and ignorant."

This is a very well thought out and well written blog, and brings up many overlooked aspects of American Catholicism.

I do think however you underestimate the power of faith in the Hispanic community versus trends in the US, mostly that religion and faith (regardless of which religion) is an intrinsic aspect of the Latin-American identity. I am Latino myself and consider myself to be in the Liberal-Catholic faction, if you will, and have observed this quite closely.

I'm very curious about the statistics and numbers of Catholics who've left/changed religions compared against those of other major religions (Protestant, Anglican, Baptist, Jewish, Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, etc.)

I realize there is no point to writing this but . . . spiderman2 wrote:

"Is it scientifically possible that a thing can build something more intelligent than itself?

The answer is a big NO."

Incorrect. The answer is yes. That's the whole point of Darwinian evolution. You should study that subject before commenting on it. You make yourself look ignorant otherwise.

"The only reason why human DNA can transform into a more intelligent human BRAIN is because the transfomation is guided by someone more intelligent."

No, it isn't guided at all.

"There MUST be a MAKER in between. That is science and most of all, that is COMMON SENSE."

Yes, this is old fashioned common sense, but it is wrong. Many other assumptions that were once common sense turned out to be wrong. For example, it was once common sense that the sun goes around the earth, and the earth is the center of the universe.

Science might be defined as uncommon sense, that defies our initial impressions and overthrows assumptions and common sense, and proves that most of what we think we know is mistaken. As Hamlet put it, there is more in heaven and earth than dreampt of in your philosophy. Or as Haldane put it: Not only is the universe stranger than we imagine, it is stranger than we can imagine.

However astounding, upsetting or improbable it may seem to you, the fact is, intelligence evolved on its own, unguided, without a plan or maker, with only natural selection as the impetus. You can be a certain of that fact as you can be certain of Newton's laws or the conservation of energy.

Someone else here commented that the Church is 2,000 years old and therefore is not likely to perish. This makes no sense. All institutions, cultures, nations and species eventually perish. Nothing lasts forever. Countless religions have gone extinct in the past, including some that lasted longer than 2,000 years. The fact that an institution has lasted a long time has no bearing on whether it is healthy and likely to continue. The Catholic church in the U.S. is in steep decline, and unless drastic reforms reverse this decline it will obviously be reduced to a small minority religion, or it will vanish like the Shaker and Sandemanian sects.

Please, please, please -- if you're going to talk about papal infallibility, make sure you understand what it means. The church does not teach that the pope is personally infallible. He is infallible when teaching "ex cathedra" on faith and morals, and this is extremely rare. The teaching itself must *already* be accepted by the faithful! He has to say when he's teaching it that he is teaching "ex cathedra" (from the chair of Peter) and this has only happened TWICE (ok, there's some dispute about a some other instances, but there is total agreement from scholars on only two infallible teachings). The two teachings concern the immaculate conception of Mary and her assumption into heaven. That's. It. Please do not make papal infallibility more than it is, because really it's not much.

It's obviously a disinformation piece aimed at destroying possibly the only institution in the Western World that still
upholds a hierarchy of values in the face of virulent Anglo-Jewish globalized capitalism ("capitalisme sauvage") which has managed to destroy the domestic economy, balkanize the population, and undermine civil society through brutalizing mass media and (unrestricted) immigration.

'Just a Comment' poster wrote "If there is "something intelligent" or "a higher power", still you have to make the connection of that intelligence with a white barbed man, sited in a place call heaven that nobody knows where it is, that sends all his holly wrath to a raped woman that decides for abortion."

The "white barbed man" happened to dropped some CODED words before and after He left. The connection of "a higher power" intelligence with that "man" can only be seen by those who understand the CODED MESSAGES.

It's obvious that you don't have that mental faculty to understand them. It is stupidity to describe a certain landscape as pretty or unsightly if the person describing it don't even have eyes, let alone, a brain or emotion to process the sight.

The worst people who can't describe you accurately are those people who never knew you in the first place and that's a fact.

Jacoby writes: "I should say, by the way, that I hold no more animus toward the Catholic Church than I do toward any other religion "

This is kind of like Nativist saying "It's not just the Blacks I hate, I also seek to drive the Catholic, Jews, and wetbacks out of town, as well."

However, it is obvious that the Jacobins...I mean, Jacoby...holds a special place in her cold heart for Catholics.

Where is "Father" Aguilar?

Any Chruch that hijacks Christ's table and the invitation to it to keep its flock and politicians in fear deserves a decline.

Andrew;

Why do you assume that people want the truth?

If they wanted the truth they wouldn't just grab on tight to the first religion they grew up with, but would question and compare and contemplate.

The indoctrination process is the enemy of truth.
What people want is a celestial Teddybear-God to make them feel safe and immortal.

Ain't that the truth?

This article has a typo:

". . . the number of young men training for the priesthood dropped from 49,00 to 4,700."

I assume that should be 49,000. Please confirm.

A factor of 10 decline is remarkable.

The Problem: So few individuals think beyond the crap imposed upon them as children. Examples? The crap dumped on primitive jungle societies by witch doctors, crap dumped on early Egyptians by their Priests, etc.. Heck - I remember (as I dumped a Houston Methodist Church when one of its well paid "Preachers" said that Christians need Ordained Ministers to really be Christians).
My God . . .NO HUMAN KNOWS GOD ...or whether there is such an entity.
WE have manufactured all known Gods, and WE still decide who shall be"Saints". Surely any idiot shoul recognize that Sainthood bestowed by Catholic Priests is a human decision - nothing to do wit God's approval or disapproval!
Think! Use your evolved BRAINS! Priest, Preachers and the Ex-Nazi Pope are MERE MEN! NOTHING MORE!!!

I laughed and laughed. If only the world were to be as she sees it. But limited information leads to errors. We should all know that much. Better to keep an open mind.

For those genuinely curious and seeking the truth of things, as opposed to dogma, I would recommend;

"God; The Failed Hypothesis. How Science Shows That God Does Not Exist". By Victor J Stenger.
Pub.Prometheus Books.NY.2007.

Very persuasive arguments for the unlikelyhood of a supernatural deity.

Sorry, Susan, but what ails the Roman Catholic Church is that at Vatican II the red hats gave way to silly season and violated the "If it ain't broke, don't fix it" rule. In the name of ecumenism, it distanced itself from the other orthodox communions, not quite what ecumenists expected (to say the least). The result of this stubbornly unacknowledged foolishness after 40 years (compare it to Bush's refusal to acknowledge the Iraq mistake after 5 years) is Catholics here fleeing to the golf course, Pentcostalism and (among some Latin Americans) indigenous and sometimes syncretic African beliefs ... or the real thing.
Now here comes Ratzi to harangue us with this failed bowdlerization of Catholicism plus a whole new set of trendy sins the Vatican just discovered ... as if we hadn't enough already!
Papal infallibility, without which the Church somehow survived for 1900+ years (incl. a Great Schism & a Reformation or two) and priestly celibacy (not required for oh, only about 1000 years) can certainly disappear from the canon with about as much trouble as the Mormons had banning polygamy (never part of the Mormon canon, rather added on by Joseph Smith; thus the Prophet in Salt Lake didn't have to bend the Almighty's ear about banning it) as one wishes the pederasts & their cassocked apologists would vanish from the Church, along with this knuckleheaded Vatican II stuff.

Interesting rhetoric, Julie Williams. I'd like to hear your thoughts after you die, too, as proof your beliefs are more than wishes, but I'm not holding the breath I owe to the planet's lower atmosphere not "God".

Susan,
The Church has many problems today, not the least which is the penetration of the American clergy by homosexuals uninterested in saving souls.

However, like Voltaire and other skeptics who earned livings for centuries grumbling exactly as you do, you may be the one calling for a priest when the onset of your death occurs.

As Blaise Pascal noted in his theory of the wager, mankind has everything to gain and nothing to lose by having religious belief.

You seem a bit more ill-humored than normal, perhaps because you sense the Holy Father's visit this week. Let's hope his appearance results in a nice outpouring of the Holy Spirit which aids you.

Susan,

You're the bomb! You are a voice of calm reason in the midst of mass delusion. Keep up the good work. Your points are valid, timely, insightful, and need to be heard. I sincerely believe that before this century is over, all organized religions that claim that their particular vengeful deity is the one true God will be all but dead. And Catholicism will be one of the first to go.

The statistics you quote are quite amazing, and it is amusing to read the posts of Catholics and other religionists who are in angry denial.

Catholicism is such a ludicrous sham that it would simply be a joke if it weren't responsible for the deaths of thousands of Christians,Jews, and Muslims. The fact that it has committed countless horrible atrocities in the name of Jesus Christ condemns it and all its adherents to eternal damnation. Otherwise, it would just be another forgotten religion.

BTW those of you who post dissertations ad nauseum should realize that no one bothers to read them. Conciseness is the mark of an organized and astute mind.

Highly skeptical though I am (many of my fellow Muslims sometimes dismiss me as a hypocrite), I have never had much to agree on with Susan Jacoby in her denunciations of Catholicism/Christianity in particular, and allreligions in general, as superstitious.

But I am especialy saddened to read such anotherwise amply moral and admirable lady making, approvingly the statement: " ... the scandal of priestly pedophilia finished the work that the disappointments of the sixties had begun."

I was deeply hurt and saddened (not happy nor somehow feeling vindicated) when I read the sensational news about "the scandal of priestly pedophilia". But at no point did I ascribe guilt or blame for that scandal to the whole Church, even though the initial indecision of the Vatican to pronounce itself against the scandal seemed to make the alieantion from the Church itself understandable. After all, the wrongdoings of a minority of priests cannot and should not lead one to lose faith in the whole system. Even if one is an atheist, one's natural morality should temper our anger gainst those who have sinned/done wrong and make us humbly realise that they could redeem themselves and become better human beings than ourselves.

However, two events DID get me deeply disappointed with, and made me very angry against, a Catholic Church that I have always held in the highest respectm even as a Muslim. One was the heartless rejection of the 'liberation theology' ideas. The second was my reading of the book "Their Kingdom Come" by the Canadian Catholic writer Hutchison. That book revealed a cynicism not only by Opus Dei within the Catholic Church but also by a certain brand of Islamic zealots, that made me cringe against my religious naivete in a way that must have approximated what Susan had gradually felt and that led her to atheism.

I am still a Muslim, I always say Muslim-borderline-agnostic. I believe that those who were born Catholic would, even with the most skeptical but rational introspection, not find enough ground for them to reject their Catholicism if the subjection of their thought-processes to the standards of their rationality was as rigorous as they claim it is. There is a non-negligible degree of unknown and unknowable in the realms of transcendent valuesand morality that we must be humble enough to acknowledge. There is also perfectibility in the human 'soul' that only spirituality can make up appreciate, and oneof the most effective medium through which this feat has been achieved from a historical perspective, is the traditional religions.

In my humble opinion, the Pope has his work cut out for him if he sees it from this viewpoint.

The Crises in the contemporary Catholic Church:

1. The inappropriate conduct of many priests, the emotional stress on the victims and the resultant billion dollars in lawsuits,

2. The lack of talent in the priesthood.

3. The lack of Vatican response to the historic Jesus movement.

4. The Church's continuing cling to original sin and the resulting subsets of crazy ideas like limbo.

5. The denial of priesthood to women.

6. The restriction of priesthood to single men (unless you are former Episcopalian priests),

7. And the continued chain of Vatican "leadership" by old European white men.

Ms. Jacoby,
Do you think that if the Catholic Church were to allow the formation of new orders for married priests to be a separate group, it would solve their sexual abuse problem? I personally wonder if pedophilia doesn't gravitate toward male-only vocations. So many people seem to think the celibacy clause is the cause of priestly pedophilia; I disagree.

The defensive addendum is nearly as long as the article. Very telling.

Spiderman2 wrote: "Nothing can create something more intelligent than itself and that's a fact".

Reuben wrote: "we came from something and that had to be placed there by a higher power".

In both cases those arguments lead to philosophical discussions, not necessarily are proof of the existance of any god or the reason for faith.

If there is "something intelligent" or "a higher power", still you have to make the connection of that intelligence with a white barbed man, sited in a place call heaven that nobody knows where it is, that sends all his holly wrath to a raped woman that decides for abortion.

Today there are sane minds that do not accept that connection, even catholic and christian minds.

Peace and best wishes,

JAC

The pope can make a mistake, bush can't.

Just ask him.

The Vatican is the "Seat of Satan". Search the Bible and you'd see the truthfulness of that statement. Jacoby is a smart woman for knowing that but she should continue searching so she can find the truth that not all religions are stupid.

"Iam the Way, the Truth and the Life. No man cometh unto the Father but by Me."

This is the absolute truth and once you will know it by yourself thru personal searching, consider yourself the most fortunate person alive.

It was interesting to hear someone who was raised catholic and become an atheist describe their view on the pope coming to America. I have always had a problem with the infallibility of the pope too but then I was raised Lutheran. It would be nice if fundamentalists could be put to in their place as the minority. I just don't know how you can be reasonable about something like religion that is so unreasonable. God to me is beyond comprehension and if you sit down and try to make sense of the concept of God you end up more confused than when you started. I just accept that we came from something and that had to be placed there by a higher power.

screw you - censors!

It was interesting to hear someone who was raised catholic and become an atheist describe their view on the pope coming to America. I have always had a problem with the infallibility of the pope too but then I was raised Lutheran. It would be nice if fundamentalists could be put to in their place as the minority. I just don't know how you can be reasonable about something like religion that is so unreasonable. God to me is beyond comprehension and if you sit down and try to make sense of the concept of God you end up more confused than when you started. I just accept that we came from something and that had to be placed there by a higher power.

Jacoby is like a broken record on this topic....boring.....

I am surprised she didn't manage to fit in her usual canard about the Inquisition.

As for "seculars" - they cause as much, if not more, suffering in this world.

Case in point, the neo-cons and their enablers (such as Chris "nose job and hair plugs" Hitchens). Also, it happens to be that the founder of the neo-conservative movement was left-leaning atheist - Leo Strauss.

Of course, the "objective" seculars will say that he wrote his horrible Utopian based theories in spite of being an atheist - where as if an religious person does some harm it is always a direct result of their orientation.

One-sided, illogical arguments, per usual: zzzzzzzzzzzzzz!

It's true that there are more false religions than there are true ones. But to see them as ALL TRUE (ecumenicalism) or ALL FALSE (atheism) is not a wise assessment. I hope Jacoby and the rest of the people here (atheists and Catholics, etc) would continue to search for the truth until they find it.

Atheists consider themselves as rational. If they truly are rational , they should consider this question.

Is it scientifically possible that a thing can build something more intelligent than itself?

The answer is a big NO.

The only reason why human DNA can transform into a more intelligent human BRAIN is because the transfomation is guided by someone more intelligent. Nothing can create something more intelligent than itself and that's a fact.

There MUST be a MAKER in between. That is science and most of all, that is COMMON SENSE.

There she is! Susan Jacoby looking to destroy Christianity again! She is on a mission, but one she will not succeed at. She has no respect for anyone except her own tribe.

Patrick;

Thanks for response. I understand your situation. and yes of course I agree that people should be left alone to believe whatever gets them through the night.

Trouble is 9/11 changed all that. I could get blown to bits because some superstitious individual wants to go to some imagined Paradise in the sky to be with his imagined maker. It makes me think that religion is a form of insanity; believing PROFOUNDLY without a scrap of evidence that there's an invisible man who lives in the sky who watches everything we do and expects us to do certain things,and we have to be dead before we can see him, is a bit much, don't you think?

It didn't used to matter. But now it does matter. Extra-ordinary claims about Gods and devils need extra-ordinary evidence in this modern scientific world we live in. Otherwise we have to consider them absurd superstitions.

For Catholics who attend Mass at least once a month, an overwhelming majority of the young and older generation believe Christ is present in the Eucharist.

This shows the ignorance of the Catholic faith. Christ was not referring to the literal bread. It is the word of God, the Bible, that transforms the person. The bread will feed the body but the Word of God will feed the soul.

The Catholic Church is an institution that SPREADS THE IGNORANCE.

Christ uses figures of speech but idiots don't get it.

Andrew, of course I see the exodus from the Catholic Church and the overall decline of faith. Anyone at all familiar with the Bible knows that the loss of faith is a recurring theme in the relationship between God and man.

It's none of my business though what other persons believe because spiritual faith is entirely a decision between each individual and God.

All I ask is that those of you who no longer believe leave those of us who still believe alone so we can continue to practice our faith in peace. We, in turn, will honor your right to be completely free of any temporal, political intrusion of our faith into your lives.

Patrick

You ignore the obvious. The church is running out of priests and believers too. Churches are closing down. Atheism is more popular than ever before. Books on the subject are bestsellers. It is the trend.

If the trend continues believers will eventually be the minority.

It's amusing reading supposedly schooled, insightful analyses of the Catholic Church which leave God entirely out of the equation -- as if the Catholic Church has any meaning at all if it's merely a collection of human beings jockeying for control and influence.

I'm a practicing Catholic and what I don't understand is if you don't like what the Church stands for and agree with its teachings then why not just go and start your own church. You can even call it the New, Improved, 100% God-free Catholic Church for all we care. Just don't waste your time and our time trying to pull an institution down to its foundations which has survived intact since the time of Jesus -- and if it's for real -- will survive intact long after you and I are dead.

I will not pretend that the decline of the Catholic Church in America saddens me. Quite the contrary, I hope it continues its slide into irrelevance. I wish the same for the fundamentalist Christian churches, and any other group that uses supernatural nonsense as the source of its authority. I am grateful for Susan Jacoby, Christopher Hitchens, and the others who have recently written books challenging the grip religion holds on this society and this world. We need rational discussion, not worship of ancient myths and texts written when the world was awash in ignorance and superstition.

Ellen R Moody;

Thanks for the giggle.

Having had your religious indicator set at "Belief" when you were a child, you can no longer think straight; and are even unable to consider even for a moment that maybe God is fiction, which many of us ex-Catholics have - after a struggle - come to realize.

There is no reason at all to believe in a sky god,when you really think about it, except people program the idea into our heads when we are children and totally vulnerable to any idea, be it ever so ridiculous, like Santa for instance, or the Tooth Fairy, or a Skygod.

Susan overcame this program and should be admired. You'd be amazed how good it feels on the sane side. You can do it too.

Julie: "Interesting rhetoric Susan, I'd like to hear your thoughts after you meet your Creator and the one who keeps your heart beating and your lungs breathing, the one in fact who keeps you in existence."

My grand uncle, a proud lapsed Catholic in a era when it wasn't fashionable to snicker openly at relition, loved it when people told him his lack of faith would send him to hell.

He's say: "Well, at least I'll have lots of friends and relatives there!"

The Catholic Church will continue to decline. I am an ex-Catholic, went to Catholic school and Catholic boarding school, the whole scene. The problem is you have an all male heirachy that are vested in their own power. Only those that agree with the ultra conservative wing (John Paul was the standard bearer) can make Cardinal and therefore, be elected Pope. Most Catholics practice contraception. The fact that the Pope and the all male clergy don't like it means little. The Church has also lost a lot of credibility with the Scandal. To protect their own, the Vatican was complicit in aiding the destruction of countless individual lives. There is nothing Christlike in that, and I'm sure if the Christ was on earth today he would be appalled. If Catholics really believed in transubstantion (the bread and wine become the body and blood of Christ) and the fact that God comes to the altar to change it, then what the Church is saying that God can do it through a man but not through a woman. What does that say about God? It's all empty rhetoric to retain their hold on power.

When people resort to personal attacks, as many of the comments here have done against Susan Jacoby, instead of addressing her arguments, it means they have lost the argument.

To be honest, I had neve heard of Susan Jacoby until I read her commentary in the WP. And I felt very sad for her . I do not know by whast process she has come to the position she now finds herself in re matters of faith occasioned by the visit of Benedict 16. What I find most regretful is that she has no understanding of the Incarnation and its relevance in the lives of millions who do understand even in imperfect ways , the mystery of God's love for us so celebrated in this Easter Season. And I pray that the bitterness brought about by her embrace of atheism as some kind of refuge for how she feels and thinks at this moment in her life, will someday disappear to be replaced by an experience of God's genuine, complete,and unqualified love for her as a daughter of the Church in which she was baptised. "Namaste"... as the Buddhists say which means that "the Divine in me honors the Divine in (her)." Ellen

Susan,
I'm one of those ex-Catholics like you. Unlike you, I don't deride others for their faith, or revel in numbers that show a decline in the faithful.

I'm aware that you, and others, consider organized religion to be a dangerous Fantasyland. You're entitled to your opinion. And speaking of Fantasyland...I doubt a single reader of your columns, regardless of viewpoint, truly believes that you "hold no animus" toward the Church.

Go in Peace, sis.

reality is much grayer than sour grapes susan would make herself/us believe.

any institution as long-lived as the church will have a blotched history...why single just one of them out?

seems to me some who have trashed religion in the past have done just as much damage.

All wishful thinking on the part of Jacoby....

What you are seeing is the revitalization of the Church after the devastation of Vatican II.

The leadership of JPII and B16 is perfect and B16 is really an amazing scholar.

There is a new crop of solid young Catholics growing, especially here in the South West, that will transform and sustain the Church - much to Jacoby's disappointment.

As for her "objective analysis" - could we really expect anything more from this "scholar" with obvious bias against Catholicism (probably stemming from familial and psychological factors)

The tech issue on here is working up again...

And so is Jacoby!

The idea of a disgruntled, former "catholic" Jewish secularist giving an objective critique of Catholicism is a really a stretch.

Jacoby, as usual, is like a bull in a china shop with her rather simple analysis and predicting the end of a 2000 year-old faith has to be a new low for her hubris.

She must be trying to keep up Hitchen's low standard and bombast on here...

I was raised a Catholic and attended Catholic schools for many years where I was taught to think for myself. I am now an anti-stupid atheist and have been since about age 15. Color me enlightened.

Interesting rhetoric Susan, I'd like to hear your thoughts after you meet your Creator and the one who keeps your heart beating and your lungs breathing, the one in fact who keeps you in existence. The Catholic Church is not fading, there are so many people who are becoming increasingly devout and who will have a positive influence on the growth of Catholicism.

Predicting the end of a 2000 year old faith is really something.

Perhaps she will also call the end of Judaism as well, but I don't think so.

Her true hatred and bile is reserved for Catholics.

Also, nothing like an "objective" critique from a disgruntled secularist who was raised part Catholic...

Daddy issues, Susan?

Predicting the end of a 2000 year old faith is really something.

Perhaps she will also call the end of Judaism as well, but I don't think so.

Her true hatred and bile is reserved for Catholics.

Also, nothing like an "objective" critique from a disgruntled secularist who was raised part Catholic...

Daddy issues, Susan?

Predicting the end of a 2000 year old faith is really something.

Perhaps she will also call the end of Judaism as well, but I don't think so.

Her true hatred and bile is reserved for Catholics.

Also, nothing like an "objective" critique from a disgruntled secularist who was raised part Catholic...

Daddy issues, Susan?

Ah so,

Fashions and cliques - in schools, in religions.

"Cafetaria Catholics", at least, are still eating in the Catholic cafetaria. It does sound like a high school cafetaria with cliques in different tables sneering at and snubbing other cliques in other tables by what they chose to think, wear, eat and hang out with.

No such thing as moderate Catholics to moderate, to act as moderators among the Catholic Right, the Liberal Catholics and the cafetaria Catholics?

As for the the Pope, he did not ask to be called the Infallible One or His Holiness. It comes with his post they voted him in for. One would think, as Popes are paragons of humility, may be personally flincing everytime someone said that to them, unless....

As for the Infallible ones, those ascribed with His Holiness, His Eminenence etc, a very small matter on what they wear as part of their role, their office and their responsibilities.

In this, we have to be gentle, considerate and understanding of male clerics of any faith not only on what they say, but especially on what they wear. After all, they are the fashion secular and religious fashion diktats.

They also have group expectations and peer pressure obviously on the appropriate garb. But as leaders of the pack, they can be trendsetters -the cutting edge of fashion and thought.

While the male lay believers wear pants and women too, the male clerics, including Buddhist monks and Hindu priests, members of the clergy of the Abrahamic faiths, are swarthed in institutionalised and traditional garb that are ankle length and look like long gowns that has not changed for centuries.

The high ranking clergy of the some denominations/sects of the Abrahamic faiths, including the Catholic faith, also were impressively looking but uncomfortable headgear. It all look adds up to very resplendant and designed to impress but cumbersome and restrictive wear.

Perhaps we are forgetting while we want to liberate women from chador/hijab/burqa that we think is symtomatic of their repression and oppression, whether by choice or imposed, we really should also look at these chaps and petition that they be liberated and liberalised from what they wear first. But then, judges wear silly robes too. And in some countries, wigs too.

It is not who you are, but what you wear also define you? Or what you wear also shaped you?

Hard to imagine Popes in a Savile Row or Armani suit and have the same cachet. They all look grand in their robes. All the same -

Liberalise the Pope of his dress code!

Then he will, perhaps, feel unencumbered and liberated in body...and then, hopefully, in the mind too.

Thanks and regards

"J"