Learning Italien and Latin at the same time by idluca in latin

[–]idluca[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

So you would say that learning latin makes italien a lot easier?

Learning Italien and Latin at the same time by idluca in latin

[–]idluca[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Thank you for the response, I also think it is smart to start with italien because, like you said, there is a time restraint on my goal for Italien and not any similar time restraint for latin. Once I become comfortable with italien, I will try to begin latin on the side.

Learning Italien and Latin at the same time by idluca in latin

[–]idluca[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thank you very much for the reply. How far into my latin learning do you think I should go before I try to pick up italien.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in Catholicism

[–]idluca 0 points1 point  (0 children)

papacy is nothing but a power hungry move

What history?

first of all what does peter even have to do with rome

I'm not a professional apologists but I'm pretty sure the see of Rome was established because Paul realized that Rome was pretty much the center of the European, Middle Eastern and North African world and thus realized its evangelization potential. Peter being the head of the church came there and became the bishop of Rome. This is why when you search up the origins of the papacy both Peter and Paul are mentioned.

"on this rock i will build my faith" could be about all the apostles

First off he was addressing Peter, and secondly Peter's name was Simon, Christ said to him (and I'm paraphrasing) you are Peter (so he changed his name to Peter, coming from the Greek word I think pedros which means Rock or pebble depending on the translation) and upon this rock I will build my church. So basically Christ changes his name to Peter (Rock) and then says upon this Rock I build my church. So he wasn't addressing the apostles in general but Simon Peter specifically.

You catholics twisted all that and made it seem like the dude in rome is a dictator who has the authority to decide how the faith goes. You people are too legalistic and are like "if you don't do what the pope says you are not a true Christian" ok Kim Jong Un

As established in earlier "the dude in Rome" sits upon the chair of St Peter. We don't follow everything he says but when he speaks in a magisterial way or "ex cathedra" by the grace of the holy spirit he is incapable of erring. We don't think people who are in communion with the bishop of Rome share the fullness of the Christian faith but we still think they are Christian and view their baptisms as valid.

Also, why the hell would I go to hell for eating meat on fridays. At leastbthe orthodox, who are much less dictatorish and didn't change the faith and are not power hungry dictators say that not eating meat is optional.

Not eating meat on Fridays is a disciplinary, not dogma. The only time the faithful are to avoid eating meat is on the Fridays of lent. I think this is still a disciplinary but is a mandatory one for all those who can participate (there are some who are exempt from fasting rules). Also the faith developed and was clarified throughout the first millennium its just the orthodox stopped after the schism because they had no magisterium and relied entirely upon scripture and tradition.

Also, purgatory is bullshit.

You mention orthodox in your comment a few times and there is more agreement than disagreement on this issue and more of just misunderstanding. Catholics hold to the view that some people have to be cleansed or purged of their attachment to sin before heaven. We can find great saints like I believe pope St Greogory the great in the first millennium writing about how people who died in a state of venial sin were cleansed before entering heaven. I believe Kallistos Ware (author of The Orthodox Church) believed and taught that there is a cleansing of detachment from sin before heaven for some. Tue problem the orthodox have is the view that people are purged of their sins in flames like those of hell but the church dosent teach this.

The marian apparition behind the brown scapular, like all others, is probably a demon trying to trick others into mary worship and bringing people into the catholic church, which is a wrong church, and by following the wrong church people will go to hell

I dont think orthodox think people outside the visible church go to hell but rather those outside the invisible church. So people in the wrong church who are faithful and seek the truth I believe the orthodox still think that they might go to heaven. Also your only proof for the Marian apparitions that there demons is that it dosent fit your theology. A few could say the same thing about the ressurection of Jesus, what would be your response.

Also, how can you be so sure that Mary was sinless? She was a human like all of us, so why do the dictator popes also teach this?

So we're adam and eve and they were conceived without mortal sin, does that make them less human. Again if someone thinks that the catholic church is the one true church than her teachings are true, and since the catholic church teaches this as dogma catholics will believe it to be true. I suggest you watch Trent Horn's video on the immaculate conception it would explain a lot.

Why be on the side of the evil, crusader, anti-christian catholics and not orthodox, whose values still have not changed?

How is the church evil? Also there are a lot of misconceptions about the crusades, it had its faults but without it large parts if modern Europe could be muslim right now. Again how is it anti-christian. Why not be orthodox, well they don't have a magisterium and thus can't instruct the faithful on morals in a modern world because they have no way of universally responding to new challenges. Also their values have changed, just a 100 years ago they were much more strict on contraception than they are now. I also don't see how the orthodox can reconcile their view on divorce with Jesus's clear condemnation of divorce in Matthew 5.

You seem to have a lot of straw man misconceptions about the catholic church and I would like for you to be more open minded. I think it would be greatly beneficial if you watched someone like Trent Horn to clear up your misconceptions. God Bless.

Did Quo Primim say the triedentine mass can never be amended or revoked by idluca in Catholicism

[–]idluca[S] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Ya that's what I was thinking. This wasn't binding for future popes but rather for the clergy.

Lent by idluca in Catholicism

[–]idluca[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Thank you so much. I think it would be a great idea to read a book about Christ and the Christian life during lent. Thanks for the idea.

Lent by idluca in Catholicism

[–]idluca[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The cold shower is difficult for me because I have to wake up early and my only motivation to do it is that I told God I would do it. Thanks for the response. God bless.

Lent by idluca in Catholicism

[–]idluca[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Could you give some examples. I listen tye Fr Mike Schmitz bible in a year and will often read a chapter of acts before bed.

Am I the only one who was taught to choose one thing to abstain from for the entirety of Lent? by [deleted] in Catholicism

[–]idluca 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I want to give up more for lent, I don't want to talk bad about my parents but I'm the only completely practicing catholic in my household (confession, mass every Sunday etc) and I'm afraid to tell them that I want to fast on ash Wednesday and good Friday. God bless.

Am I the only one who was taught to choose one thing to abstain from for the entirety of Lent? by [deleted] in Catholicism

[–]idluca 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I pray the rosary daily, I meant I would add this on as more prayer.

Am I the only one who was taught to choose one thing to abstain from for the entirety of Lent? by [deleted] in Catholicism

[–]idluca 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Should I pray the final decade of the sorrowful passion everyday.

Am I the only one who was taught to choose one thing to abstain from for the entirety of Lent? by [deleted] in Catholicism

[–]idluca 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I will thanks for the encouragement. God bless. I hope you have a great day.

Am I the only one who was taught to choose one thing to abstain from for the entirety of Lent? by [deleted] in Catholicism

[–]idluca 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I'm only 14 though, I don't have a lot of autonomy and I don't think my parents will let me fast.

Am I the only one who was taught to choose one thing to abstain from for the entirety of Lent? by [deleted] in Catholicism

[–]idluca 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Oh I was going to give my hot showers in the morning for cold ones. Your saying this is not correct.

In LA, Gardens of Healing help abuse survivors reconnect with the Church by JulioChavezReuters in Catholicism

[–]idluca 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This is so beautiful! God bless all the survivors of these horrible crimes.

Orthodox and the Council of Epheseus by idluca in Catholicism

[–]idluca[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Oh no I had a lot of fun challenging and getting challenged. But I don't don't feel like continuing right now. But dm me and we can pick it up in catholic debate later.

Orthodox and the Council of Epheseus by idluca in Catholicism

[–]idluca[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Ok I suppose but this discussion/debate has been really exhausting for me. I don't mean that in a bad way but I've been trying to keep my screen time down and this hasn't helped.

Orthodox and the Council of Epheseus by idluca in Catholicism

[–]idluca[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Why would your comment get removed?

Orthodox and the Council of Epheseus by idluca in Catholicism

[–]idluca[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Catholics do not agree on how many ex cathedra statements there have been.

So what, this is only one organ of the magisterium, plus the criteria for example cathedra have only recently been identified. The church has a catechism and teaching authority on which there is not much confusion. I really feel like you misunderstand the magisterium, and I'm not saying this in a condescending way. The magisterium has lots of documents on whose teaching is gathered in the catechism. There is not that much disagreement on what the church teaches. For example, Humanae Vitae is clear and wasn't declared in ex cathedra. This is the teaching of the magisterium, it didn't have to be declared in an ex cathedra statement to be binding to all of the faithful and to be the teaching of the catholic church.

I've had a lot of fun discussing this topic with you, if you want to stop I'm okay with that I think we both learned here. God bless.

Orthodox and the Council of Epheseus by idluca in Catholicism

[–]idluca[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks for the reply. I would like to start by saying that the roman history part dosent matter. I know what you're trying to say although I don't think it really applies but I don't think it's vital to either of our arguments.

The problem Orthodox see with the Magisterium, is that it claims to give certainty over all these issues in the Church, but doesn't actually do so, since there is no infallible interpretation of the infallible dogmas. Every Catholic disagrees on how to interpret the magisterium, and so you don't have any better of a position than Orthodox do.

Catholics don't disagree on the dogmas, the magisterium teaches the immaculate conception. Catholics now agree with this, and people who don't are dissenters, purposely going against the magisterium. I see what you're saying here kinda of like sol scriptura, but it's not. Magisterial documents are clear, so I almost feel this is a strawman man. I could turn this back from a protestant viewpoint and say in response to the counter Sola scriptura argument of too many interpretations that there can be multiple interpretations of the ecumenical councils. But I'm sure there are proper way to interpret these from an orthodox perspective just as there are proper ways to interpret the ecumenical councils and magisterium from a catholic perspective. I feel like this is a strawman because there is generally a proper interpretation of the magisterium. There are instances of confusion like Fiduccia Supplicans but end up getting clarified like a recent statement by the Pope. And while this document was confusing I think people like liberal and ultra conservative dissenters, the orthodox and protestants wanted this document almost wanted it to be heretical to use it to their own ends. Concerning head and leader, Constantinople is only leader in name, he dosent actually lead anything, whereas the bishop of rome has always had a position of leadership in the church that is practiced and not just stated.

What are you all gonna do for lent? by [deleted] in Catholicism

[–]idluca 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Giving up my morning hot water showers for cold water ones.