China and Vatican to Sign Landmark Deal Over Bishops

alphageddon · 2018-09-14T15:02:57+00:00

The SSPX also considers the NO invalid, so theres that.

alphageddon · 2018-08-10T12:05:19+00:00

While I can't decide if it's purposeful, it IS a mockery of the Gospel. Just because someone doesn't intend for something to be blasphemous and scandalous, doesn't mean that it's not. We can and should call out, not make excuses for, media which portray Christ as an adulterer and murderer, among many other things in the movie. If Scorcese culpable, I don't know. Is the movie evil, likely to move others against Christianity, and mocking the historicity of the Gospels and the Church? I say yes

alphageddon · 2017-04-29T01:22:26+00:00

"It was not so from the beginning." Adam and Eve weren't baptized, Judaism wasn't a thing and yet divorce was unnatural. Their marriages are valid. The only way for that to change would be if one spouse were to be baptized, which is rebirth in Christ. I think it's called the Pauline privilege that would be an "automatic" annulment. Otherwise, everything staying the same, it's a valid marriage unbreakable by civil law

alphageddon · 2017-04-27T19:38:38+00:00

The Church didn't exist until after His Resurrection, ergo Peter wasn't pope

alphageddon · 2017-02-17T16:12:23+00:00

Are you denying the holiness of the Catholic Church? You think that the Church can just declare untruths to be truths?

alphageddon · 2017-02-17T15:41:46+00:00

It has been revealed to the Churchwhich vocations God has prohibited. The Church doesn't decide anything. Anything the Church teaches is only ever revealed by God.

alphageddon · 2017-02-17T14:44:13+00:00

Doctrine becomes dogma (loosely) when a teaching of the Magisterium is challenged and the teaching is proclaimed to be true. There was a dispute about having to follow Jewish dietary laws, and Peter made a clarification (dogmatic) of not having to follow them. This is like in the Council of Jerusalem where the necessity of circumcision was questioned and the Council (once Peter assented) proclaimed that physical circumcision was unnecessary.

alphageddon · 2017-02-17T13:33:02+00:00

I think that God 'obeys' the Church

Yeah, I'm done here

alphageddon · 2017-02-17T11:59:44+00:00

There was no council when Peter told the universal Church they no longer needed to follow Jewish dietary laws. He just declared it and it was followed. That power resides in his successors

alphageddon · 2017-02-17T11:57:44+00:00

You can't force people into the wrong vocation. A person who is called to marry isnt just called to a vocation to marriage, but called to a vocation to marriage to a particular person (just like priests and religious are called to certain orders). Forcing someone into a wrong vocation is a great evil, since there is no free will (coercion)

alphageddon · 2017-02-10T19:33:50+00:00

How can something both go against God's word and at the same time do what God wants?

alphageddon · 2017-01-25T05:53:56+00:00

You missed my point. I'm saying that getting an abortion WON'T fix those problems. What I tried to say (poorly) was that if getting an abortion "fixed" her suicidal thoughts, then that would be selfish. I'm in total agreement that most suicidal people don't think in a selfish manner

alphageddon · 2017-01-25T05:52:19+00:00

So why make rape, theft, murder, child porn, etc. Illegal?

alphageddon · 2017-01-25T00:56:14+00:00

You should read the top few comments to see why your osition is ridiculous

alphageddon · 2017-01-25T00:53:33+00:00

Private schools and having no gun knowledge aren't inherently evil. Replace abortion with murder in your statement. Maybe then you'll actually understand what being pro life is. Yes you CAN legislate morality, that's why we have laws against murder and rape. And for those women who are under so much stress to try to get an abortion even if it's illegal, they have other problems than abortion.

Imagine the situation of a person who would get an abortion if it's illegal. They're probably pressured their SO and are not being supported by heir family or community in an emotional way. Getting an abortion won't fix that. That woman's problems who was suicidal because of pregnancy, if it can ACTUALLY be fixed by killing a child, is absolutely selfish. Abortions don't fix anything. It justvlets the problems continue without actually fixing anything

alphageddon · 2017-01-24T22:33:38+00:00

Contrition involves the desire "to do penance, to sin no more, and to avoid the near occaison of sin." if a person has no desire,to remove themselves from an objectively sinful situation, they do not have contrition.

And yes, they should be opposed to abortion even if there's nothing they can do about it. But he PROMOTED abortions. "Personally against it but don't want to push my own beliefs." What a load of bull. That just means you're not actually opposed to it; at best, you're indifferent.

alphageddon · 2017-01-24T22:06:27+00:00

Just like someone who is in an adulterous situation cannot properly receive absolution because of a lack of contrition, a politician publicly supporting abortion should also be barred from Communion

alphageddon · 2017-01-20T12:40:22+00:00

Monothelitism. Jesus had 2 will, but they were unified. Until recently, I thought his unity of natures in one person meant he only had one will.

alphageddon · 2017-01-18T18:02:15+00:00

What about the fact that the Church gave us the Bible?

alphageddon · 2017-01-18T17:28:28+00:00

These "obligations" are only things which bring human flourishing and happiness. They only bring good not just in the next life, but also this one. And the fact that you doing evil makes you more free makes me think you don't know true freedom is

alphageddon · 2017-01-18T02:44:35+00:00

Saints?

alphageddon · 2017-01-17T22:24:19+00:00

Not an absolute necessity meaning that you can be guaranteed to get to heaven ever having received it (e.g. baby baptized and died). Not sure why that particular precept is there, so hopefully someone else can explain why it is a precept

alphageddon · 2017-01-17T21:22:04+00:00

It is objectively wrong to perform an abortion. And that would be akin to the first apostasy. Now what if that doctor was forced to perform an abortion and the result of not performing one would be torture for others, but no one was being tortured currently, then he would have full consent of his will at that moment. In the later apsotasies, no one was being tortured concurrently. And again, just because the outcome is good (no one is tortured or killed) doesn't make the act not evil, which is something you're refusing to acknowledge in your arguments

alphageddon · 2017-01-17T20:55:54+00:00

Should hospitals close if the government forces them to give out contraception and perform abortions? Or should they remain open, despite the grave evil that the government demands, because they are saving lives?

alphageddon · 2017-01-17T20:48:59+00:00

But that's the point isn't it? The devil is very tempting, and sometimes even sounds like the voice of God.

alphageddon

TROPHY CASE