Refaire le péché d'Adam n'est pas une brillante idée

Φιλολoγικά/Philologica : Comment savons-nous le Moyen Âge? · New blog on the kid : Refaire le péché d'Adam n'est pas une brillante idée · Φιλολoγικά/Philologica : Comment savons-nous l'histoire primordiale?

Ce matin, je parlais à un homme qui est de en dehors de la caste intellectuelle. Ce qui n'empêche nullement d'être intelligent, il l'était au moins sur un sujet. Plus son boulot de barista, faire que le café soit bien mais pas trop bien pressé en dessous du jet d'eau de la machine n'est pas à la portée d'absolument tous et chacun, j'en suis moi-même un peu handicapé (j'ai essayé).

L'évolutionnisme a quelque part une ambiance de "la connaissance" et d'y croire est donc en quelque manière de manger le fruit de la connaissance. Et Satan est quelque part présent pour souffler au moins à certains qu'ils seront comme des dieux.

Dans les Années Trente, la plupart des gens qui s'intéressaient pour l'Atlantide avaient une curiosité si par hazard ils descendent des dieux et pour certains même s'ils re-seront un jour des dieux. À Tolkien d'écrire à la suite un conte titré Akallabêth qui raconte l'Atlantide, à l'inverse, avec la moralité que c'est la diable qui souffle "vous serez comme des dieux" et il rigole de ceux qu'il trompe.

Si l'Atlantide est démodée, il y aura d'autres curiosités. L'évolutionnisme ne l'est pas encore, il est encore en mode; pourtant, comme l'avait constaté le bariste, il est faux.

Par tel ou tel volcan on peut déjà savoir que la méthode potassium argone ne fonctionne pas pour le présent, et pourquoi donc fonctionnerait-elle pour le passé? Néanmoins, il y en a à y croire, par exemple que les empreintes de pieds de Laetoli sont d'il y a un million d'années et demi. Et que donc l'humanité a fait un énorme progrès depuis, car lescrânes trouvés "de ce temps" à la région ressemblent à des singes. Et pour ce qu'il y a des vrais hommes datés par carbone 14 à il y a 40 000 ans, le seule chasse et cueillette pour des dizaines de milliers d'années, on imagine que peut-être l'homme a évolué lui-même aussi, qu'il n'a pas juste fait évoluer ses moyens de subsistence.

On a des gens qui s'imaginent vraiment comme des dieux en train de redéfinir le bien et le mal : quand le vrai Dieu a couplé le sexe et la procréation, eux, ils disent que le plaisir devrait être accessible sans les enfants ou qu'on pourra nier à des gens qui se font ce plaisir d'avoir d'enfants, même à un homme et à une femme mariés. Et aussi ils disent que ceci devrait être accessible pour ceux qui ne veulent pas bosser pour leurs enfants mais, aussi, pour ceux dont ils disent qu'ils ne devraient pas faire d'enfants.

Et inversement, pour d'autres, ils disent qu'ils ne devraient pas rester stériles involontairement. Ils proposent la conception par éprouvette, un embryon pour le couple, trois pour la mort, directement ou par la recherche - ce qui est une tuérie de trois hommes.

Et si les parents (normaux) ont déjà leurs enfants, ce n'est pas encore fini. Il y a les DDAS (en Norvège, Suède, Danemark et Finlande ils ont probablement un récord mondial d'enlèvements des parents : en Suède, il y a 14 ans, j'ai lu la statistique qu'un tiers des placements devaient être interrompus, à propos le cas d'une fille qui était de retour chez son père, le vrai, après d'avoir été aggressé sexuellement par son père d'accueil). Et l'école plus ou moins obligatoire. Et s'il y a quelqu'un que l'un ou l'autre ne fait pas évoluer, il y a la psychiatrie aussi.

Oui, il y a des gens qui semblent croire à ce fameux "vous serez comme des dieux" : ils se comporte de manière à signaler à d'autres qu'ils sont restés des simples mortels.

Souvent, je ne parle pas de ceci, je préfère fustiger les technicalités à propos la fausse connaissance. Moins les volcans et potassium - argone. Et davantage carbone 14 qui, en même temps qu'il ne donne pas une gamme correcte du temps écoulé, il en donne au moins une gamme corrigible selon la chronologie biblique, quand on tient compte d'un taux de carbone 14 qui monte.

"Il y a 40 000 ans" - ça pourrait être il y a 4974 ans, l'année du Déluge (2957 avant Jésus-Christ, selon St Jérôme).

En 4974 ans, on doit avoir en chaque échantillon 54,788 % du taux à l'origine. Si donc le taux qui reste est de par exmple 0,792 % du taux atmosphérique, on présume que ça aurait baissé de 100 % à 0,792 %, ce qui prendrait 40 000 ans. Si en réalité on a eu 4974 ans, on n'a perdu que 45,212 %, le taux d'origine doit être 1,445 ou 1,446 %.

Et si le taux vient de monter à 69 fois le taux d'origine, ceci n'est pas arrivée en une nuit, il y a eu une montée lente. Et encore pas trop lente, elle doit avoir fini avant le début de l'ère chrétienne et encore un peu en avant.

Mais, bien-sûr, si l'étude de cette montée, les diverses approches où je peux y aller (et je multiplie les tables sur mes blogs) est une étude assez intéressante, il ne convient pas d'oublier d'où vient et où mène l'idéologie que je fustige.

Je remercie l'homme de ce matin de m'avoir donné ce bon rappel. "Vous serez comme des dieux", dit quelqu'un quiveut que nous soyons au contraire des très pauvres diables, ce qu'il convient à éviter, pour cette vie et pour la vie éternelle.

Et l'antidote se trouve en bonne partie dans la Sainte Bible.

Hans Georg Lundahl
BU de Nanterre
Pape St. Silvère*
20.VI.2017

PS, je demande pardon pour le délai de quelques heures, je viens d'écrire aussi l'article avant et encore un sur le blog Assorted retorts, à savoir ... on Misrepresenting Origins of Catholic Church - les tables se trouvent sur ce blog ci après un début sur Datation de Carbone 14, comment ça carre avec la Chronologie Biblique et une table en théorie idéale en Avec un peu d'aide de Fibonacci ... j'ai une table, presque correcte - et ensuite, j'ai intégré d'autres facteurs, en anglais, sur un autre blog, Creation vs. Evolution, avec une assez bonne table à Interim II St Jerome A / St Jerome Fibonacci et avec un dernier article où j'essaie de faire la même chose avec la chronologie de Syncellus (Déluge en 3358 plutôt que 2957 avant Jésus-Christ), où je fais peut-être le début un peu mieux, mais où je me suis aussi planqué dans un petit paradoxe chronologique pour les patriarches - qui n'est pas là en St Jérôme, de toute manière : Continuing Interim III to Joseph in Egypt. PPS, le paradoxe était une simple erreur de subtraction, corrigée maintenant./HGL

* In insula Pontia natalis sancti Silverii, Papae et Martyris, qui, cum Anthimum, Episcopum haereticum, a suo praedecessore Agapito depositum, restituere noluisset, a Belisario, agente impia Theodora Augusta, in exsilium pulsus est, et ibidem, pro fide catholica multis aerumnis confectus, defecit.

Chrétiens en Inde

Q

Est-ce que les Français savent que les chrétiens en Inde sont opprimés par le gouvernement nationaliste hindou de Modi ?
https://fr.quora.com/Est-ce-que-les-Fran%C3%A7ais-savent-que-les-chr%C3%A9tiens-en-Inde-sont-opprim%C3%A9s-par-le-gouvernement-nationaliste-hindou-de-Modi/answer/Hans-Georg-Lundahl

Hans-Georg Lundahl

Bloggueur et débatteur d'internet. ENG/FR

A répondu lundi

Il me semble que non, les français ne le savent pas.

Avez-vous les détails?

Nikhil Roger

lundi

Je vis dans une région méridionale appelée Tamil Nadu, cette région est très instruit, plus libéral et plus riche que le nord parlant hindi. Donc, je ne sais pas combien il est mauvais, mais de ce que je vois, entendre et lire, il semble que les choses sont très mauvaises.

The Guardian : Christians in India increasingly under attack, study shows
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/jan/11/christians-in-india-increasingly-under-attack-study-shows

Hans-Georg Lundahl

Maintenant

Merci!

Sometimes One is Thankful for Some Good

If Texas forbade all abortions, it would be even better, but I thanked even for forbidding dismemberment abortions.

You can do so too:

http://www.returntoorder.org/petition/support-governor-greg-abbott-pro-life-abortion-bill-dismemberment/?PKG=RTOE0333

Je viens de signer la pétition : plus un centime pour le Planning Familial

Il m'est arrivé de ne pas signer tel ou tel truc, parce que même si le sujet me tient au c&oe;ur, il y a tel ou tel aspect qui n'est pas signable.

J'ai soigneusement vérifié que ceci n'est pas le cas, avant de signer celle-ci.

Pas un aspect éthique dedans qui est douteux, et quand à la phrase "Une pratique qui fait tous les ans 220 000 petites victimes dans notre pays, soit 70 000 de plus que le cancer," je viens juste de lire la statistique pour 2015 pour le cancer, il est de 150 000, soit 70 000 moins que l'avortement. Donc, je sais que je n'ai pas signé un faux, quand aux statistiques.

Donc, pas juste que je recommande la pétition, je viens de la signer moi-même, sans réserves, la voici:

http://petit.io/petition/droit-de-naitre/plus-un-centime-pour-le-planning

Malheureusement que sur la signature mon nom de famille n'apparaît pas, juste les quatre prénoms:



Ceci dit, c'est bien moi.

Hans Georg Lundahl
BU de Nanterre
Sts Aurée, évêque
et sa sœur Justine
16.VI.2017

You Call That "Child Marriage", Jane?

Child Marriage and Christians
June 13, 2017 by Jane the Actuary
www.patheos.com/blogs/janetheactuary/2017/06/child-marriage-christians.html

And is a married 16 year old mother any worse off than a unmarried one? After all, the difference between “our” teen brides and “their” teen brides is that in the US, marriage is a way of managing teen pregnancies and ensuring the father does his duty, but elsewhere, teen marriage is outright encouraged by society.

Which are all pretty lousy rationalizations.

Child support laws and social pressure within the community should be sufficient to push fathers to caring for their children. Marriage laws in which children can marry with parental permission affirm the cult’s belief and lead those girls to think that what’s happened to them is OK. And even if only a small number of children are affected, it’s still a law that should be removed from the books.

Did I hear you right? I just heard you call a sixteen year old girl who is pregnant a "child"?

Just checking your religious affiliation a bit ...

"Home Catholic Channel Jane the Actuary"?

And a bit earlier a post called "How Does a Pope Greet a President?" (not linking) with the clear non-Pope Bergoglio in picture, so you are probably a Novus Ordo Catholic.

And very out of touch with the history of your Church, or the Church it pretends to continue.

There was a case in Poland in the 18th C. where a real Pope was concerned with a real child marriage.

• the bride was not 12 yet, which is the legal minimal age for brides in the Catholic Church;
• if I recall correctly, she was not yet even 11 and a half;
• and even at 11 and a half, you need Papal dispensation for marrying so low, if you are a girl (at 13 and a half for boys);
• AND the bridegroom or not validly such, was a Protestant, which totally makes a Papal dispensation impossible anyway.

I am sorry, I forgot the reference.

For the normal minimal age (without special dispensations) being 14 for the male and 12 for the female partner, I can however give a reference or two:

"Home > Summa Theologiae > Supplement > Question 58"
Article 5. Whether defective age is an impediment to marriage?
http://newadvent.com/summa/5058.htm#article5

And giving you the corpus of this article:

I answer that, Since marriage is effected by way of a contract, it comes under the ordinance of positive law like other contracts. Consequently according to law (cap. Tua, De sponsal. impub.) it is determined that marriage may not be contracted before the age of discretion when each party is capable of sufficient deliberation about marriage, and of mutual fulfilment of the marriage debt, and that marriages otherwise contracted are void. Now for the most part this age is the fourteenth year in males and the twelfth year in women: but since the ordinances of positive law are consequent upon what happens in the majority of cases, if anyone reach the required perfection before the aforesaid age, so that nature and reason are sufficiently developed to supply the lack of age, the marriage is not annulled. Wherefore if the parties who marry before the age of puberty have marital intercourse before the aforesaid age, their marriage is none the less perpetually indissoluble.

In other words, St Thomas Aquinas as firmly as FLDS believed a girl of 12 was a woman fit to marry, unless puberty was delayed a bit after that. Where he disagrees (see elsewhere) is on bigamy.

"Yeah, but that is just one opinion" ... no, just like St Thomas Aquinas is so often elsewhere simply defending the Bible, the most read Church Fathers or a dogma like those of Nicaea or Constantinople, or like the Transsubstantiation recently defined in IV Lateran Council, here he is simply defending the normal canon law of the Church.

He does that too, quite a lot. He's the intellectual who defends the non-controversial opinion against those taking controversial ones.

"But surely that didn't happen in practise?"

I just mentioned Poland. Someone tried to push it downward a bit. Not much, the Polish szlachta are not Muslims, just down to eleven and some. An age in which marriage is legal in Tibet under the Dalai Lama (apart from the fact his country is occupied by China men). And the Pope said, "no, no, she must wait to twelve, and she can only marry a Catholic even then!" Not a Protestant, like the guy who had wanted to marry her when she was less than twelve.

I just read an article on French wikipedia, that other week, saying "in the Ancien Régime only 4 % of the women married before 17" - maybe so, but Marie Antoinette who had no problems scraping together a first home, was among the 4 %. She was 14.

In German wiki, I went through two family genealogies, going back in the case of Maria von Baden, and if I recall correctly, going forth a bit in the case of Philippa of Hainault. Citing myself:

Median 20
Untere Quartile 19
Höhere Quartile 21 / 23
Mittelwert 20.79 oder 20.75

One girl of 15, 3 of 17, one of 18 and three of 19 at 6 and 7th position, 20 at positions 12 / 13, positions 18 and 19 divided between 21 and 23 and one old maid married at 30. One of those married at 17 could have been just 16. This was Maria von Baden, but now lets look at Philippa of Hainault's kin:

Median 17 Jahre
Untere Quartile 12 oder 13 Jahre
Obere Quartile 19 Jahre

Note that of the 26 I looked at, 2 to 5 were under 12 when married. Depending on incertainties, similar to those involved in number of married under 12, the position 7 of 26, or lower quartile, is either at 12 (second to last among 12) or at 13 (first at 13). 8 or 9 of the 26 were 13 or younger when married first time.

Yes, it did happen.

"Oh, that was the Middle Ages ..."

Sure. And I thought you were a Catholic, i. e. proud of the Middle Ages?

But perhaps, among Novus Ordo Catholics, you have seeped in a Protestant pride in getting "past the Dark Ages" a bit in reverse, so you are ashamed of Middle Ages?

Jane, if you would like to be considered anything like a Catholic by me, you can do better than that!

Until 1917, canon law had basically considered anyone above the age of 12 capable of marriage. Thus, when the 1917 Code raised the minimum age for marriage in the church to 14 for girls and 16 for boys (1917 CIC 1067), the change was greeted as an improvement that recognized that something beyond mere reproductive ability was required for Christian marriage.

Too Young to Marry
CanonLaw.info
Dr. Edward Peters
http://www.canonlaw.info/a_tooyoung.htm

And here comes a little reasoning, it is on your side:

The idea of children hardly into their adolescent years being allowed to marry is a little embarrassing, and canonists queried on the topic usually reply that very few 14-year-olds get married anymore. Canon law, we add, was meant to apply in a wide variety of cultures, including those in which 14-year-olds marry happily (just where that land is we leave to anthropologists to determine), and in any case, we note, boys cannot marry until they are 16. Obviously, not all questioners are satisfied with these replies.

I actually read an anthropologist who was writing in 1910, just before the 1917 code of canon law. In Spain back then, marital law was at the same 14 / 12 limit as prescribed by St Thomas. Austria - the author mentioned nothing about when boys could marry, unless same provisions were there for both - the minimal age for girls was 14 (as in canon 1067 of 1917 canon law) with parental consent, or 21 without such. Italy, however, as a progressive country, had introduced the 18/18 limit. Before Soviet Russia followed suit, in the 1917 Revolution or the years after. One can argue that the raising of marital age in 1917 canon law was due to undue Italian pressure on the Papacy, and while Pope St Pius X had resisted, Benedict XV didn't. It also involves more acceptance than previously of usury (counselled to Benedict XV by a canon lawyer Pacelli, later known as Pius XII).

In Italy of 1902, the state prescribed the 18/18 limit, which meant that if one Maria Goretti and one Alessandro Serenelli had decided to marry, they would have had to wait for 6 years, since he was 18 but she not quite 12. Probably there was some dispensation for those who had gotten a pregnancy going before 18 and that is what Alessandro Serenelli was proposing and the saint refusing because it was a mortal sin.

If Nettuno had not been under the progressive rule of Sardinian house, if Nettuno had in 1870 remained Papal States, instead of that State going down, the marital age would have been 12 for women, Alessandro Serenelli would have been more sheltered from bad books, and less impetuous, and he would probably have made a proposal which they could have made serious business of in Church a few months later.

Under the novelty of 1917, they would still have had to wait for two years. But that is at least better than six. In case you don't know what the 18/18 limit and Alessandro Serenelli's reading of bad books and his impetuousness caused as a drama, I hope you pay attention to Saint of the Day on upcoming July 6th.

Hans Georg Lundahl
from Nanterre University Library
Saints Auraeus, bishop, and his
sister Justina, Martyrs
16.VI.2017

Bonum Festum Corporis Christi

lectoribus Christifidelibus exopto/HGL

Dina Ali, Updated with Parween Alhinto

#SaveDinaAli - The girl who tried to escape Saudi Arabia
Barbara4u2c
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OU7k7fE6krA

What is happening to Christian countries?

It was the Philippines - a Catholic coiuntry - which returned Dina Ali to Saudi Arabia. And Parween Alhinto is by the Netherlands being pushed back to Northern Iraq:

Geller report : Dutch government RETURNED Yezidi ISIS sex slave to Iraq but grants permits to Muslim migrant criminals
By Pamela Geller - on June 9, 2017
http://pamelageller.com/2017/06/dutch-sex-slave-return-to-isis.html/

While Netherlands is no longer fully a Christian country, it used to be very feminist!/HGL

Une série contre l'évolutionnisme sur trois autres blogs

Répliques Assorties : Formation de la terre (quora) · Croyez vous dans la théorie de l'évolution? (moi, non, quora) · gm b1 lou : Je viens de lire Darwin, par Christian CLOT et Fabio BONO · Correspondance de Hans Georg Lundahl : âge du monde avec Gabriel Audisio

Quoran Questions - Mainly Middle Ages and Catholicism

Q

Why is there huge amounts of people that are still be-fooled by the papacy?
https://www.quora.com/Why-is-there-huge-amounts-of-people-that-are-still-be-fooled-by-the-papacy/answer/Hans-Georg-Lundahl

C on Q

I could understand in the medieval ages how the papacy manipulated Christians into thinking that the pope is the key to heaven just so they can monopolize on religion & politics at the time, but today is a different age yet a lot of people cannot think for themselves?

ARq

Answer requested by Anonymous

Own answer

Hans-Georg Lundahl

Studied religions as curious parallels and contrasts to Xtian faith since 9, 10?

Written just now

"I could understand in the medieval ages how the papacy manipulated Christians into thinking that the pope is the key to heaven just so they can monopolize on religion & politics at the time,"

Why? I could for one not understand how papacy could have done that without at least fairly good Biblical support.

Especially as they were NOT monopolising politics.

"but today is a different age yet a lot of people cannot think for themselves?"

You seem to have little talent for thinking for yourself if that is how you contrast Middle Ages with today.

• thinking for oneself has not become easier by mass education, since it is a compulsory one;
• thinking for oneself does not mean thinking what you would want someone thinking for himself to think.

Q

Was the spread of Islam a reaction to Christianity?
https://www.quora.com/Was-the-spread-of-Islam-a-reaction-to-Christianity/answer/Hans-Georg-Lundahl

ARq

Answer requested by Victor Asanache

Own answer

Hans-Georg Lundahl

Studied religions as curious parallels and contrasts to Xtian faith since 9, 10?

Written 11m ago

In what exact way?

I would say that on Arabic Peninsula, it was a reaction against Jewish vs Christian feuds, as imported from Ethiopia into Yemen the century or centuries before Muhammed.

But in a more general way, I don’t know. Why would it be?

Q

There is any evidence that "shuriken" style weapons were used in Europe during ancient/middle ages?
https://www.quora.com/There-is-any-evidence-that-shuriken-style-weapons-were-used-in-Europe-during-ancient-middle-ages/answer/Hans-Georg-Lundahl

C on Q

The first shuriken were improvised from pieces of broken weapons and armor found in battlefield. As it is simply a sharp piece of metal or a spike, it is quite simple to make. There is any evidence of its use in ancient/medieval western world?

ARq

Answer requested by Adler Mow

Own answer

Hans-Georg Lundahl

Middle Ages fan + Latin student in Lund (where Medieval Latin rules).

Written 15m ago

I spontaneously came to think of Der Bundschuh.

It was some league which had lost its banner, and the banner keeper or sn else made an improvised banner of one of his shoes. They won the battle and the shoe was accepted as their new banner.

However, that is not a shuriken style weapon, it is if anything a shuriken style banner.

As for weapons, I don’t know.

Adler Mow

Not mean to be harsh, but are you being sarcastic or “shuriken” has meanings others than the weapon?

Hans-Georg Lundahl

I was giving it an extended meaning for the context.

I was also adding “if anything” precisely because I don’t know if such a meaning exists.

Adler Mow

Ahhh… well :-)

Q

What are the most realistic movies ever made depicting the Middle Ages?
https://www.quora.com/What-are-the-most-realistic-movies-ever-made-depicting-the-Middle-Ages/answer/Hans-Georg-Lundahl

ARq

Answer requested by Christian Dechery

Hans-Georg Lundahl

Been going to movies most of my childhood and teens.

Written 24m ago

It is actually easier to come up with unrealistic ones.

Even The Name of the Rose is less realistic as a movie than as a book.

I read the book, did not bother about the movie.

Q

How did society and the church see people who disputed creationism before an understanding of evolution?
https://www.quora.com/How-did-society-and-the-church-see-people-who-disputed-creationism-before-an-understanding-of-evolution/answer/Hans-Georg-Lundahl

Hans-Georg Lundahl

Studied religions as curious parallels and contrasts to Xtian faith since 9, 10?

Written 27m ago

I consider the terms of the question misleading.

Evolution belief is not an “understanding of evolution”.

It is not an understanding of genetics, mutations, epigenetics and natural / by breeder / selection.

And creationism is not a complete fixity of species either.

I will give an example : Isaac de la Peyrere was a Jew who converted to Catholicism.

France has a way of honouring Evolutionists even if they are not orthodox Darwinists or Neo-Darwinsists. Therefore, it is not surprising that streets are named for him.

So, I had to look him up.

He wrote a book stating that there were human people before Adam and which seemed to indicate for instance Black Africans or Red Indians were really not Adamites but pre-Adamites.

His book was condemned, as it should.

So, this story shows that in condemning Evolutionism, I am taking my stand with the Church of back then, with the Church of the Centuries and indeed Millennia (close to two of them by now, just counting the Catholic Church without the predecessor Jewish Church as existing between Aaron and Kaiaphas, or its predecessor the Patriarchal Church).

Q

How many languages are spoken on planet earth?
https://www.quora.com/How-many-languages-are-spoken-on-planet-earth/answer/Hans-Georg-Lundahl

ARq

Answer requested by Stephen Kahn

Hans-Georg Lundahl

I speak two langs, Latin and Germanic. In a few dialects.

Written just now

Earth is not a planet, so actually none.

Or is there a bar called “Planet Earth” somewhere?

Now, on Earth as non-moving centre of the Universe, I think there are about 6000 languages.

Most of them spoken by very few people.

Q

Which is the true Christianity: Protestantism or Catholicism?
https://www.quora.com/Which-is-the-true-Christianity-Protestantism-or-Catholicism/answer/Hans-Georg-Lundahl

C on Q

I don’t want to start a debate. I have not had the relationship with God that I seek and am told I can have, so I asked which is true christianity and want to see for myself which will bring me closer to God.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

Studied religions as curious parallels and contrasts to Xtian faith since 9, 10?

Written Mon

I think James Hough and another friend of mine already answered, namely Catholicism.

Next question is : what is the true Catholicism, Orthodoxy or Roman Catholicism?

I’d say, and I think they said, Roman Catholicism.

NEXT question is, what is true Roman Catholicism, who is the true Pope?

Can you trust “Francis” or “Benedict” or both, or should you look around between Pope Michael, Palmarians, Alexander IX, Feminist Colinists in Canada …? I say the second and have submitted to Pope Michael.

“another friend of mine” - Alex Pismenny. A good guy, but I keep forgetting his name.

James Hough

Catholic who teaches Catechism, RCIA, and Prayer classes.

Updated Feb 17

Upvoted by Christopher Delich,

Ioannes Petras, and Alex Pismenny

Catholicism is the only religion which was established by God, in person, and guaranteed by Him. It is the only one that He sent the Holy Spirit to guide, the only one He promised to be with it until the end of time. Catholic Christianity is His Body in a very real sense, and His Bride, and He does not have multiple bodies, and he is not a polygamist.

Protestantism is a collection of various religions which were made up by disaffected Catholics who LEFT Christ’s Church to found their own “churches”. They may call themselves Christianity, they may rewrite the Bible to agree with their teachings, and they rewrite Christianity itself to be palatable to their followers, but the only Church that Christ established and guaranteed, the only Church that has been here for 2,000 years, and the only Church which will be here at the end, REMAINS the Catholic Church, and no amount or redefining terms or rewriting history or the Bible is going to change the fact that there were no other Christians for hundreds of years, and there will no other Christians in heaven.

On that last statement, please note that since the Catholic Church IS the Body of Christ (see Acts (9)) anyone who is saved is saved through the Catholic Church even if they are not a visible member of the Church. Thus a baptized non-Catholic Christian, IF they are saved, are saved through the Catholic Church. And even a non-baptized person who is genuinely searching for God, and trying to lead the best life possible in their circumstances would still be saved through the Church.

Does this mean that people do not need to become Catholic, or that Catholics do not need to evangelize? By no means. Everyone who is saved dies in a state of grace - with no unforgiven mortal (serious) sin on their soul. The only normal way for sin to be forgiven is through the sacrament of penance.

Can God save someone outside the Church who has never heard of Christ? Can God save someone who was raised with an animus towards the Catholic Church which makes their conversion all but impossible. Sure, He can. Does He? We don’t know. The only thing that we know for sure is that He established His Church - the Catholic Church - for men’s salvation. Everything outside the visible Catholic Church is mere speculation on our part.

Johan Nijhof

Feb 15

Interesting view, I always heard Catholicism was established by a power hungry emperor, Constantine, who presided the council in 325, and used much violence (inter alia melted lead poured into the throats of unwilling bishops) to form his church into a suitable instrument for his power politics. He himself was no Christian by the way, he was only baptized when he died. If you think there has been 2000 years of Christianity, you calculate badly. 2000 years ago Christ was just an adolescent, and had not even entered his ministry. Let`s see if your church will pass this milestone yet.

James Hough

3 upvotes

Feb 15

Hi Mr. Nijhof,

The fact that you never heard of commonly accepted history just proves that you were educated in a Protestant influenced education system.

It’s not my view, it has been the infallible teaching of the Catholic Church since the beginning. Everyone who has taken a Church history course knows when Constantine was baptized, and knows exactly how “Christian” he was. Which has exactly nothing to do with a church which was already nearing its third century mark at that point - after having surviving atrocious treatment by the Roman Empire.

The ridiculous theory that Catholicism was established by Constantine is just a red herring, one among many, concocted by Protestants to try and give themselves validly by attacking Christ’s Church. Won’t work, Christ had guaranteed His Church and kept it around for 1,500 years at that point, anything they come up with is just ridiculous at that point.

2,000 is just a round number referring to two millennia of Christianity, I’m not using a calculator.

pax,

James

Petronela

Feb 15

If I were you, I just choose to reply they who really curious only.

Let him go on denying. It's hard to change the denials perception.

:D

James Hough

2 upvotes

Feb 15

You’re probably right, but then you never know. As soon as I start treating everybody like a denier, the next one turns out to be someone who genuinely never heard the truth!

pax,

James

Petronela

1 upvote

Feb 16

Hahahahahahahaa! You patience should be awarded!

Great job sir!

Alberto Cano.

Feb 17

Your statement is rather hard. Would Pope Francis agree with you on no other Christian faiths followers being allowed into heaven in the final days?

James Hough

Feb 17

Hi Mr. Cano,

Please re-read the answer, I tried to make it more specific. See if that helps, and get back to me, okay?

pax,

James

Alberto Cano.

Feb 18

Yes is much clearer now. Thanks for adding that information. I grew up in a chatolic-protestant home so you can imagine how much fun that was. Personally I love chatolic liturgy and Im very fond of this new Pope. I have some argentinian friends that actually knew him personally and they tell me this man has an exceptional kind heart. On the other side my local chatolic church lacks a sense of a community that I did found among protestant and my pastor is like a father to me, always there when we need him. Well thanks for your reply and may God continue to use you in his plans.

John Rallison

Feb 16

First, you have left out the entire Eastern/Orthodox church in terms of churches having a 2,000 year history.

Second, ou disowning all other Christians reminds me of Paul telling the believers that the eye cannot say to the hand, “I have no need of you.”

The Reformation was finally touched off (it had been brewing for a while) when the Roman Catholic church, in an effort led by a Dominican Friar named John Tetzel, was selling forgiveness of sins and release from purgatory to fund the refurbishment of St. Peter’s Basilica. Martin Luther tried to ask questions and point out theological problems with this process (read his 95 Theses) but the response of the Roman Catholic church was to put a price on his head. Martin Luther did not want to start a new church. He wanted to call the Roman Catholic church back to her Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, who would never have sold forgiveness. He didn’t even sell healing. “Freely you have received, freely give.” I would be willing to have a discussion in much greater detail if you are interested. I am being intentionally brief because if Quora has a fault, it’s that some of the answers posted are very long.

James Hough

Feb 16

No need, I did my thesis in college on this and I know the facts in greater depth than you are presenting, and that was 40 years ago, I have a much greater knowledge and understanding of it now than I did back then. And I have no wish to refight the wars of religion.

John Rallison

Feb 17

There isn’t room in Quora to present the facts in depth. And most people wouldn’t be interested. You seem very comfortable in your positions, so I wish you the best. Pax, John

Inserted comment:

[There certainly IS room on or in quora to present the facts in depth.]

James Hough

Feb 17

Hi Mr. Rallison,

As I have gotten older, what is important has become much more important to me; and I strive each and every day to know and do the Will of God in my life. I find it extremely sad that so many people over so many centuries have tried to come up with their own versions of Christianity.

Although we are all called to be evangelists in our own particular field, and none of us can walk away from that, nevertheless, I find myself overwhelmed with just caring for and educating the converts right in front of me. I do find it interesting and necessary to answer questions when I can spare a few minutes, but I must always draw the line if it threatens to tear away time from those whom God has given to me to take care of.

I don’t know if any of us can ever be described as “comfortable” while we are away from the Lord; this life was never ever meant to be comfortable, it is a time of decision, and time of fighting for Him and His Kingdom. Anytime I start to feel comfortable, I know that I am sliding the other way, away from my God and what is asked of me.

Does that make sense?

Oremus pro invicem,

James

ARq

Answer requested by Trish Meyer :

Alex Pismenny

Catholic Christian.

Written Feb 17

There is little I can add to James Hough’s answer.

On the other hand, it appears that many answers here are written as a shopping guide: “this part is good, that part is bad, pick one”. That is not a serious approach. Religion is not a club, not an object of art and not a lifestyle choice. The purpose of religion is simple: to teach you how to have eternal life after you die.

Anyone interested in salvation should avoid facile answers stemming from the falsehood that one is saved by faith alone and is instructed in salvation by scripture alone. These were gross simplifications of faith, and these both simplifications are contradicted by the Holy Scripture itself:

…wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead?

Was not Abraham our father justified by works, offering up Isaac his son upon the altar? Seest thou, that faith did co-operate with his works; and by works faith was made perfect? And the scripture was fulfilled, saying: Abraham believed God, and it was reputed to him to justice, and he was called the friend of God. Do you see that by works a man is justified; and not by faith only? And in like manner also Rahab the harlot, was not she justified by works, receiving the messengers, and sending them out another way?

For even as the body without the spirit is dead; so also faith without works is dead. (James 2:20–24)

Faith is necessary for salvation, but so do good works. In fact, faith, as this passage teaches, cannot be separated, let alone seen in opposition to good works. We are saved by both; and indeed even though the scripture praises faith a good deal, nowhere does it say that we are saved by faith ALONE as Protestantism teaches.

Neither is the scripture alone is the Rule of Faith. If it were, then it would have said it somewhere. It doesn’t. The Holy Scripture is praised many times, but nowhere does it formulate that unfortunate Protestant dogma. And indeed:

...if thy brother shall offend against thee, go, and rebuke him between thee and him alone. If he shall hear thee, thou shalt gain thy brother.

And if he will not hear thee, take with thee one or two more: that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may stand. And if he will not hear them: tell the church. And if he will not hear the church, let him be to thee as the heathen and publican. Amen I say to you, whatsoever you shall bind upon earth, shall be bound also in heaven; and whatsoever you shall loose upon earth, shall be loosed also in heaven. (Matthew 18:15–18)

Here you go: the Church and not the Scripture is the Rule of Faith; it is the Church that resolves disputes among Christians.

And who rules the Church?

Invisibly, Christ does; He said that the “gates of hell” shall not prevail against “His” Church. Not “your” church, “His” church. (Matthew 16:18).

But visibly, the Church is hierarchical:

Take heed to yourselves, and to the whole flock, wherein the Holy Ghost hath placed you bishops, to rule the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood. (Acts 20:28)

ordain priests in every city, as I also appointed thee (Titus 1:5)

Think about it.

James Boll

2 upvotes

So then, brothers, stand firm and hold to the traditions that you were taught by us, either by our spoken word or by our letter. 2 Thessalonians 2:15

Q

Catholics: how do you know that Protestantism and other forms of Christianity are not correct where they differ from Catholicism?
https://www.quora.com/Catholics-how-do-you-know-that-Protestantism-and-other-forms-of-Christianity-are-not-correct-where-they-differ-from-Catholicism/answer/Hans-Georg-Lundahl

Hans-Georg Lundahl

Studied religions as curious parallels and contrasts to Xtian faith since 9, 10?

Written just now

Because they don’t have the Catholic Tradition behind their positions.

And that means they don’t have the Apostolic Sucession behind it either.

And THAT means they are not the Church described in Matthew 28:18–20.

This refers to Protestantism.

With Eastern Orthodox, it can be a bit delicate as in the time when schism broke out both sides accused each other for inventing novelties and claimed to be only applying what had always been taught.

Finally, Eastern Orthodox don’t have as good a case as they think, but they have a better one than Protestantism.

Q

Why were the early middle ages called "dark ages"?
https://www.quora.com/Why-were-the-early-middle-ages-called-dark-ages/answer/Hans-Georg-Lundahl

C on Q

There were negative consequences for europe due to the collapse of the romam empire, but were those centuries so bad to be called the dark ages?(besides the justinian plague)

ARq

Answer requested by Rodrigo Carlos dos Santos :

Hans-Georg Lundahl

History buff since childhood. CSL & Eco added to Medieval lore. + Classics.

Written Mon

Obviously you can’t call them the Dark Ages just due to Justinian Plague.

That would be like calling XXth C. the Dark Ages just due to 1918 flu pandemic. Or just due to AIDS. Or just due to Ebola. …

There are two options:

• a series of disasters for government and frontiers, mainly;
• a lack of [written] sources compared to earlier and later.

Either of these would be mostly finished by the time of Charlemagne.

Q

What is the stance of the Catechism of the Catholic Church on gambling?
https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-stance-of-the-Catechism-of-the-Catholic-Church-on-gambling/answer/Hans-Georg-Lundahl

ARq

Answer requested by Amanda Marie :

Hans-Georg Lundahl

Studied religions as curious parallels and contrasts to Xtian faith since 9, 10?

Written Mon

If you mean a Catechism which is truly of the Catholic Church, I think any would give this answer:

• if the stakes are so low that stealing would be a venial sin, taking what you win on gambling is a venial sin;
• if they are so high that stealoing would be a mortal sin, taking what you win on gambling is a mortal sin.

Note that by gambling you mean not a production or service with risk taking in the part of repayment, but an agreement to hoard money or other things, including future purchases of coke bottles (would not be mortal!) in a lump, and decide that whoever wins on sth truly related just to chance, normally, like the roll of dice or the playing of cards (which means : including where the chance element is most basic, even if there is a tactics element to it too), gets the lump.

If you mean the non-Catholic work termed “Catechism of the Catholic Church”, I think it would say the same, even if I have not checked : it is non-Catholic on other items, such as possibility to prove existence of God or perhaps also literal inerrancy.

Advice to a Pregnant Girl (quora)

Q

I am pregnant with my P.E. teacher’s child. Should I keep it and tell him?
https://www.quora.com/I-am-pregnant-with-my-P-E-teacher%E2%80%99s-child-Should-I-keep-it-and-tell-him/answer/Hans-Georg-Lundahl

Hans-Georg Lundahl

Was bullied in school, both as pupil and as teacher. Against school compulsion.

Answered just now

You should certainly keep the child.

If you have any confidence in your PE teacher (with PE teachers it might be misplaced, they might be a polygamous lot), you could try to arrange so you could:

• a) no longer be his PE pupil
• b) after that carry on affair openly and marry him.

In that case, you should tell him.

But, if you have any doubts about him, at the very least tell your parents first, and make sure he can’t force you to abort!

If he’s already proven a jerk, go to the police. BUT first to your parents.

The PE teacher might want to wiggle out of economic responsibilities.

If so he might want to put some pressure on you to abort.

When going to the police, make sure they understand you intend to charge PE teacher economically only after birth of child and only after he’s proven the father. And have your parents at hand so they can’t try to push you into a mental hospital for the story. Even ask your dad to bring a gun, just in case.

Hoping of course, all these worries turn out OK and you get the man you want. But if so, be prepared to have your parents at hand. It’s a dangerous world even for a lone man of 28, sometimes, so imagine what it is to a lone girl of … I imagine you are below 18 even?

Best wishes!

"It's the kind of thing heretics do"

Fr Hunwicke's Mutual Enrichment : Older than the Octave
http://liturgicalnotes.blogspot.com/2017/06/older-than-octave.html

Since there is a triple six sequence in the post number, I'll check the ASCII for Gaiseric .... no direct hit.

But in the light of the comment: what shall one expect of Arturo Sosa Abascal or of Ralph Heskett?

In 455, the Arian Gaiseric was attacking Rome (he took it on the Ember Wednesday, secured thousands of potential candidates for the slave markets, and pillaged most of the basilicas ... it's the sort of thing heretics do).

Signed

Petition to: Prime Minister of Poland, EU Commissioner for Migration, And the Leaders of all EU members states

After terror attacks, say 'NO' (like, Poland) to EU immigration quotas
http://citizengo.org/en/pc/71234-after-terror-attacks-say-no-poland-external-immigration-quotas-forced-eu?m=5&tcid=36012823

I don't see each and every Muslim living here as an enemy, but I do see people importing more and more of them as being somewhat so./HGL