Today's example of Christians behaving well

[byco42]

I don't think you're allowed to criticize your pope.

Depends on the context. One can certainly disagree with anyone else, including the pope. One can comment contrarily on what he says that is not doctrinal or dogmatic, but, then, in my opinion, this pope is doing a great job of that himself. Which can be cause to disagree. As is, for me, actually.

But I continue to pray for him and I include in my daily Rosary an Our Father, Hail Mary, and Glory Be ?for the intentions of the Holy Father, in accordance with God?s will.?

Then I don?t concern myself with the outcome.

 

[tinselwolverine]

Depends on the context. One can certainly disagree with anyone else, including the pope. One can comment contrarily on what he says that is not doctrinal or dogmatic, but, then, in my opinion, this pope is doing a great job of that himself. Which can be cause to disagree. As is, for me, actually.

But I continue to pray for him and I include in my daily Rosary an Our Father, Hail Mary, and Glory Be ?for the intentions of the Holy Father, in accordance with God?s will.?

Then I don?t concern myself with the outcome.

Yeah that?s probably a good idea. That?s what I would do.

 

[Gulo Blue]

I don't think you're allowed to criticize your pope.

I don't expect you to be plugged in to Catholic matters, but this is a big enough thing going on for enough years to maybe be the radar of people that are into politics enough to wonder about the issues influencing the Catholic vote. There's a significant amount of criticism for the Pope coming from certain American Catholic Bishops. To me, sometimes they feel like they wish American Catholicism was more like the American evangelical Christian religions.

The disagreement definitely undermines authority, leaving us more causally educated Catholics to fend for ourselves - which might be a good thing. Picking up a Bible and reading the New Testament for myself in the first time for a long time...I'm kind of surprised as I'm reminded how much of it is about calling out the hypocrisy of religious leaders. How did the religious leaders leave that in for so many centuries? And guess who sounds more like Christ, the Pope or the American Bishops that don't like him?

 

[Gulo Blue]

Then I don?t concern myself with the outcome.

Why not? Sounds Buddhist. Sounds like a path to Nirvana.

 

[byco42]

Why not? Sounds Buddhist. Sounds like a path to Nirvana.

It?s quintessentially Catholic to surrender all you have, think, and produce to God. So I have ultimate faith in Him. I?m not going to ?ascertain? that my prayers are answered, because they always are, according to His perfect will.

My sole purpose is to be an instrument of His will. I voluntarily make this decision each day. I consecrate myself to Him.

Even the heathen Tinsel grasps this concept.

 

[Gulo Blue]

It?s quintessentially Catholic to surrender all you have, think, and produce to God. So I have ultimate faith in Him. I?m not going to ?ascertain? that my prayers are answered, because they always are, according to His perfect will.

My sole purpose is to be an instrument of His will. I voluntarily make this decision each day. I consecrate myself to Him.

Even the heathen Tinsel grasps this concept.

Probably a matter of semantics. A good servant has to be concerned with situation they are serving in. I get the wisdom in not being too worried about things that are out of your control, but I also think there's such a thing as being too dispassionate. I don't think we were created with all these feeling with the intent that they should all be buried.

 

[byco42]

Probably a matter of semantics. A good servant has to be concerned with situation they are serving in. I get the wisdom in not being too worried about things that are out of your control, but I also think there's such a thing as being too dispassionate. I don't think we were created with all these feeling with the intent that they should all be buried.

Much of your reply is tangential to my initial post and subsequent response. An example is ?being not too worried? when ?worry? is not even a consideration. Another is ?burying feelings.? Communion with God is not a ?feeling?; it is an act of faith.

I trust God, His Son, the Holy Spirit, The Blessed Mother, and the Angels and Saints. And there?s absolutely no way whatsoever you can determine the level of my ?dispassion?, if it existed at all.

Prayer is passionate. Prayer is servitude. Prayer is surrender.

The Catechism clearly defines prayer as a "vital and personal relationship with the living and true God" (CCC, no. 2558). Prayer is Christian "insofar as it is communion with Christ" (CCC, no. 2565), and a "covenant relationship between God and man in Christ" (CCC, no. 2564).​

 

[Gulo Blue]

Much of your reply is tangential to my initial post and subsequent response. An example is ?being not too worried? when ?worry? is not even a consideration. Another is ?burying feelings.? Communion with God is not a ?feeling?; it is an act of faith.

I trust God, His Son, the Holy Spirit, The Blessed Mother, and the Angels and Saints. And there?s absolutely no way whatsoever you can determine the level of my ?dispassion?, if it existed at all.

Prayer is passionate. Prayer is servitude. Prayer is surrender.

The Catechism clearly defines prayer as a "vital and personal relationship with the living and true God" (CCC, no. 2558). Prayer is Christian "insofar as it is communion with Christ" (CCC, no. 2565), and a "covenant relationship between God and man in Christ" (CCC, no. 2564).​

Yeah, we're talking past each other with language that's probably not being interpreted as intended. I see that you're passionate about something and not concerned with the outcome and I don't follow.

 

[byco42]

Yeah, we're talking past each other with language that's probably not being interpreted as intended. I see that you're passionate about something and not concerned with the outcome and I don't follow.

I?m not ?concerned? because I trust God. What is not clear about this?

Matthew 6

 

[Gulo Blue]

I?m not ?concerned? because I trust God. What is not clear about this?

Matthew 6

Praying for the intentions of the Holy Father, in accordance with God?s will seems solicitous to me.

 

[byco42]

Praying for the intentions of the Holy Father, in accordance with God?s will seems solicitous to me.

Just as with my own prayer, God transforms all prayers ?in accordance to His will?. The pope?s prayers are answered no differently by God. God is not a vending machine, and I want to always keep that in mind.

 

[Gulo Blue]

Just as with my own prayer, God transforms all prayers ?in accordance to His will?. The pope?s prayers are answered no differently by God. God is not a vending machine, and I want to always keep that in mind.

Then is it right to say you pray for any specific thing every day? Is prayer more talking or more listening?

 

[byco42]

Then is it right to say you pray for any specific thing every day? Is prayer more talking or more listening?

Prayer is a two-way exchange. I do pray for an end to abortion and the conversion of sinners each day as a daily Rosary intention. And I make every effort to listen to the Holy Spirit and recognize Him as such when He speaks to me. It?s not easy, nor always evident. But I know that He does.

I believe that He prompted me to read scripture almost every day, because they are often the actual words of Jesus.

There is also a lot of spontaneous prayer that I make that I believe is generated by the Holy Spirit. Brief petitions, mostly. ?Lord, have mercy on me, a sinner.? ?Jesus, I trust in you.? Things like that.

I also have a series of daily meditations and prayers that I complete each morning.

 

[Spartanmack]

I don't think you're allowed to criticize your pope.

That's incorrect but how was my question a criticism of the Pope?

 

[Michchamp]

Pope says "sins of the flesh" - by which he appears to be meaning sex outside of marriage between consenting adults - aren't that big of a deal. He's right, you know.

this:

Francis? rankings of the worst wrongdoings followed the resignation of a Paris archbishop, who quit over a relationship with a woman earlier this month. However, the 70-year-old French cleric, Michel Aupetit, denied being intimate with the anonymous female, behavior that would break his promise of celibacy, according to Reuters.​

They punish THAT kind of sexual relationship?!?!

 

[byco42]

Pope says "sins of the flesh" - by which he appears to be meaning sex outside of marriage between consenting adults - aren't that big of a deal. He's right, you know.

this:

Francis? rankings of the worst wrongdoings followed the resignation of a Paris archbishop, who quit over a relationship with a woman earlier this month. However, the 70-year-old French cleric, Michel Aupetit, denied being intimate with the anonymous female, behavior that would break his promise of celibacy, according to Reuters.​

They punish THAT kind of sexual relationship?!?!

?Sins of the flesh are not the most serious,? said the Pope. He?s right. And the NYP deliberately obfuscates this direct quote from its own article with this headline:

Pope Francis says ?sins of the flesh? aren?t that ?serious? ? very irresponsible to place his quoted words around a headline that fabricates a lie about his position, and that of the Church. To be expected.

That Lust is not ?the most serious? of the ?seven deadly sins? is accurate.

It?s third on the list: pride, greed, lust, envy, gluttony, wrath, and sloth.

Lust is still a deadly (mortal) sin, meaning that it separates you from God, assuming that the conditions of mortal sin are all met: It?s a (grave) mortal sin, completed in full knowledge, with deliberate consent.

EDIT: More misinformation:

Francis? (sic) rankings of the worst wrongdoings followed the resignation of a Paris archbishop, who quit over a relationship with a woman earlier this month.​

It?s the Church that has established the relative severity of the seven deadly sins, not Pope Francis.

 

[tinselwolverine]

?Sins of the flesh are not the most serious,? said the Pope. He?s right. And the NYP deliberately obfuscates this direct quote from its own article with this headline:

Pope Francis says ?sins of the flesh? aren?t that ?serious? ? very irresponsible to place his quoted words around a headline that fabricates a lie about his position, and that of the Church. To be expected.

That Lust is not ?the most serious? of the ?seven deadly sins? is accurate.

It?s third on the list: pride, greed, lust, envy, gluttony, wrath, and sloth.

Lust is still a deadly (mortal) sin, meaning that it separates you from God, assuming that the conditions of mortal sin are all met: It?s a (grave) mortal sin, completed in full knowledge, with deliberate consent.

EDIT: More misinformation:

Francis? (sic) rankings of the worst wrongdoings followed the resignation of a Paris archbishop, who quit over a relationship with a woman earlier this month.​

It?s the Church that has established the relative severity of the seven deadly sins, not Pope Francis.

How do you know they?re not ranked in reverse order, like they do in the presentation of the finalists and the winner of the Miss America pageant?

In that case lust would move from third to fourth.

 

[Gulo Blue]

The full translation was probably lost. To separate yourself from God, a sin must be completed in full knowledge, with deliberate consent, by a Scotsman.

 

[byco42]

The full translation was probably lost. To separate yourself from God, a sin must be completed in full knowledge, with deliberate consent, by a Scotsman.

Do you want this for yourself or not? There is no middle ground.

PART THREE: LIFE IN CHRIST
1691 "Christian, recognize your dignity and, now that you share in God's own nature, do not return to your former base condition by sinning. Remember who is your head and of whose body you are a member. Never forget that you have been rescued from the power of darkness and brought into the light of the Kingdom of God."1​

 

[Gulo Blue]

Do you want this for yourself or not? There is no middle ground.

PART THREE: LIFE IN CHRIST
1691 "Christian, recognize your dignity and, now that you share in God's own nature, do not return to your former base condition by sinning. Remember who is your head and of whose body you are a member. Never forget that you have been rescued from the power of darkness and brought into the light of the Kingdom of God."1​

I don't think I follow what you're getting at, but 'full knowledge' is a caveat so exclusive, it renders sin nearly impossible. Nobody with full knowledge would ever commit one. Anything anyone has ever regretted was done without full knowledge, since something must be learned to cause regret.