Slashdot Mirror

Not "the" you delusional fruitcake.

Please educate yourself. I know Americans are proud of their ignorance but this is embarrassing.

https://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?recnum=6530

Are you a Jews For Jesus nutcase?

You do know that Jesus was Jewish?

..even if the freaking pope walks up and slaps him with a live trout while declaring him to be an ignorant boob.

I wouldn't put it past Francis to do exactly that. I'm an atheist ex-papist and I must say, I'm impressed with this new pope. He's metaphorically done that already to the Hard Christian Right. Francis is a Catholic, same as the priest that proposed what became known as the Big Bang theory.

A very good and enlightening read on Father George Lemaitre can be found here. Worth the 10 minutes to learn about a very important and often ignored astrophysicist.

They are just not encouraged to THINK about it.

Really?... Start here if you'd like. It illustrates internal debates beginning way back with St. Augustine, and continues today. Google can turn up thousands more.

Hell, The US Catholic Church can't even decide which translation to use! ...and note the last link, an informal guide to choosing. I'll expand the relevant bit:

"At Catholic Answers we are often asked which Bible version a person should choose. This is an important question about which Catholics need to be informed. Some have been given very little help about how to pick a Bible translation, but keeping in mind a few tips will make the decision much easier. There are two general philosophies translators use when they do their work: formal or complete equivalence and dynamic equivalence. Formal equivalence translations try to give as literal a translation of the original text as possible. Translators using this philosophy try to stick close to the originals, even preserving much of the original word order. Literal translations are an excellent resource for serious Bible study. Sometimes the meaning of a verse depends on subtle cues in the text; these cues are only preserved by literal translations. "

The only universal recommendation I could Google up is that literal translations are better than dynamic (pre-interpreted to make more readable) translations. So, err, for an organization that you purport to be all big on control, you'd think that they would not only have one translation, but that they would recommend one which was dynamic (that is, pre-interpreted), no?

As for the Index Libororum Prohibitorum, its purpose has changed dramatically over the years, and for the past and present centuries, holds little if any of what you're representing it as. You may want to actually look up what it really is (link provided for convenience).

The Catholic Church, with one foot proudly marching into the Twentieth Century, scientifically and socially, and one foot firmly planted in the Dark Ages, scientifically and socially.

The exorcism should, if possible, be carried out with the consent of the possessed person

Anyone who ties up, restrains, or otherwise threatens an unwilling person for an exorcism ritual is a criminal and should damn well be arrested and imprisoned for it. Just as we'd imprison someone for murder if they tied someone to a stake and burned them as a witch.

With assistance from four nuns, priest Daniel Corogeanu bound Cornici to a cross, gagged her mouth with a towel, and left her for three days without food or water. The ritual, the priest explained, was an effort to drive devils out of the woman. Cornici was found dead on June 15; an autopsy found she had died of suffocation and dehydration... Maricica Cornici is not the first innocent victim of an exorcism. On August 22, 2003, an autistic eight-year-old boy in Milwaukee was bound in sheets and held down by church members during a prayer service held to exorcise the evil spirits they blamed for his condition. An autopsy found extensive bruising on the back of the child's neck and concluded that he died of asphyxiation. In the past ten years, there have been at least four other exorcism-related deaths in the United States alone

When an exorcism results in death, the people responsible damn well should be arrested and imprisoned for murder, or manslaughter at minimum.

-

Actually, that ain't how it works - what happens is a bit in reverse of what you posted.

Nowadays, priests have to actually weed out mental and physical illness as a factor, and find secular help for those who are simply ill. Making that diagnosis obviously requires the help of medical and psychiatric professionals, and this conference is likely examining those bits, among other things.

Occam's Razor kicks in at this point, yanno?

(not talking about you, mind - but...)
Of course, that tends to deprive the Telegraph (and a sizable portion of Slashdot) the opportunity to indulge prejudices, from the looks of it.

Should we also pray for Patrick? What are your thoughts on that aspect or method of helping someone?

From what I've been taught and come to believe:

The Chaplet of The Divine Mercy is an especially powerful prayer that can be offered to God for the sake of those who are sick and dying. [Note: Jesus == "The Divine Mercy"]

This prayer, in a moral sense, takes on special power when prayed in the presence of the Blessed Sacrament. Here is a directory for Catholic Churches and Chapels that have set times for or perpetual adoration of Jesus Christ really and bodily present in the Eucharist.

Here is a nice audio recording (RealAudio) that can be used to learn this prayer in song/chant form. Most people simply recite, rather than sing it.

There is also a popular "praise and worship" style sung-version of this prayer. Here is a sample recording; you can buy the full-recording on CD.

I have prayed this chaplet many times for sick, dying, despairing, addicted, and/or lonely family members, friends and strangers. Try it! The mercy of God is awesome!

Learn more about Saint Faustinaand The Divine Mercy Devotion, thanks to the Marians of the Immaculate Conception.

Here's the official hard line:

• 5. Regarding the grave sin of abortion or euthanasia, when a person's formal cooperation becomes manifest (understood, in the case of a Catholic politician, as his consistently campaigning and voting for permissive abortion and euthanasia laws), his Pastor should meet with him, instructing him about the Church's teaching, informing him that he is not to present himself for Holy Communion until he brings to an end the objective situation of sin, and warning him that he will otherwise be denied the Eucharist.

  6. When "these precautionary measures have not had their effect or in which they were not possible," and the person in question, with obstinate persistence, still presents himself to receive the Holy Eucharist, "the minister of Holy Communion must refuse to distribute it" (cf. Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts Declaration "Holy Communion and Divorced, Civilly Remarried Catholics" [2002], nos. 3-4). This decision, properly speaking, is not a sanction or a penalty. Nor is the minister of Holy Communion passing judgement on the person's subjective guilt, but rather is reacting to the person's public unworthiness to receive Holy Communion due to an objective situation of sin.

  [N.B. A Catholic would be guilty of formal cooperation in evil, and so unworthy to present himself for Holy Communion, if he were to deliberately vote for a candidate precisely because of the candidate's permissive stand on abortion and/or euthanasia. When a Catholic does not share a candidate's stand in favour of abortion and/or euthanasia, but votes for that candidate for other reasons, it is considered remote material cooperation, which can be permitted in the presence of proportionate reasons.]

Any questions?