USCHO Fan Forum
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.
Religion: Catholics, Episcopalians, Atheists, All Are Welcome!
- Thread starter MissThundercat
- Start date
- Status
Nailed it.
Kepler
Cornell Big Red
FadeToBlack&Gold
8647
Islam still operating as if it's the 11th century. Meanwhile, parts of Xtianity are somewhere in the 19th.
I'd say that we should abolish all this superstitious BS and make everyone join the 21st. Without the fear of eternal punishment from some form of deity though, it's likely some percentage of the global population will default to behaving like undomesticated animals.
Kepler
Cornell Big Red
I'm pretty sure the consensus after 10,000 years is that the amygdala portion of the population is incapable of behaving unless they think there's a Cosmic Cop. So keep god for them but don't give them the vote.
MissThundercat
Are the cis okay?
Heads up:
Proverbs 22:6 says "train up a child in the way they should go, and when they get older, they won't depart from it."
Basically, if you go to a generic church on any given Sunday and scan the audience, a good half of them are there because Mommy and Daddy said this what they should be doing. They might ID as Christian, but they're weak theists.
And it's amazing how showing empathy and humility will teach you that only an extremely small fraction of them are raging assholes, even in conservative West Michigan. For every 1 raging fundamentalist, I've found 10 genuinely decent people.
Proverbs 22:6 says "train up a child in the way they should go, and when they get older, they won't depart from it."
Basically, if you go to a generic church on any given Sunday and scan the audience, a good half of them are there because Mommy and Daddy said this what they should be doing. They might ID as Christian, but they're weak theists.
And it's amazing how showing empathy and humility will teach you that only an extremely small fraction of them are raging assholes, even in conservative West Michigan. For every 1 raging fundamentalist, I've found 10 genuinely decent people.
aparch
Well-known member
Catholicism is going through a crisis tonight, and it's going to be fun to see how the church twists itself to correct this.
A catholic priest has been found to be using the wrong pronoun during baptism over his 20+ year career.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/catholic-priest-andres-arango-baptisms-invalid-phoenix-church/
The interesting thing is this has exploded and now caused other priests to examine tapes of baptisms performed to which they have also done a similar pro-noun mixup.
Some priests have even found that when they were baptized as children, the priest performing the baptism used the wrong words, which nullifies the current priest's status. And every baptism the current priest performed, despite being correct, are invalid.
A catholic priest has been found to be using the wrong pronoun during baptism over his 20+ year career.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/catholic-priest-andres-arango-baptisms-invalid-phoenix-church/
The interesting thing is this has exploded and now caused other priests to examine tapes of baptisms performed to which they have also done a similar pro-noun mixup.
Some priests have even found that when they were baptized as children, the priest performing the baptism used the wrong words, which nullifies the current priest's status. And every baptism the current priest performed, despite being correct, are invalid.
MissThundercat
Are the cis okay?
MissThundercat
Are the cis okay?
From Father Nathan Monk on FB.
I’ve had countless people reach out to me asking my opinion on the issue of the priest who incorrectly baptized thousands of people. If you aren’t aware, here is a quick recap: a Roman Catholic priest recently resigned because he said “we baptize you” instead of “I baptize you” during the sacrament. An investigation happened, and it turns out this priest has been saying it this way since his ordination. The Church has ruled the baptisms invalid.
And my opinion is: that’s silly.
Most sacraments in the Church can only be performed by a priest or bishop. For example, only a bishop can ordain a priest. Only a priest can hear confession or consecrate the bread and wine during communion. However, under extreme circumstances, any baptized person can perform a baptism.
If you were to find yourself at the scene of an accident and someone requested to be baptized, you could do it. The rules are simple: use water and say, “I baptize you in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.” Bam! Baptism.
The Church also accepts baptisms from other churches as valid. If you converted to Catholicism from a Protestant church, they would not require you to be baptized again. As long as the church believes in the trinity, baptizes with water, and does so in the name of the “Father, Son, and Holy Spirit,” that baptism is considered valid.
The reason for this is because the creed says, “we believe in one baptism,” meaning you can only be baptized the one time. To require someone to be baptized a second time would be considered heresy.
In my personal and professional opinion, this is an absurd response, and I can not find anything to justify it in canon law. The Roman Church choosing to allow the sacraments to take place in the vernacular post-Vatican II was bound to cause these types of variations in liturgical practice. Most especially for bilingual clergy, as was the case with this priest.
I can not personally find any justification for declaring these baptisms invalid; they may be illicit but not invalid. Illicit means whenever something is done outside the protocol or authority of the Church. That is how baptisms of Protestant churches are viewed, valid but illicit.
I think the response of the Church to this incident is legalistic and cruel. It is cruel both to the congregants, drawing into question the validity of their baptisms, weddings, etc., and it is cruel to this priest. And, as an aside, I find the swiftness with which they handled the alleged misuse of one word within the baptism ritual verses *gestures broadly at all other issues within the church as a whole* is just flat out appalling.
In conclusion: whether you got dunked or sprinkled, no matter the gender of the person who did it, or the words used, if you were baptized in the name of the trinity, you are baptized. Period, the end, and I can’t believe this has become such a scandal.
Actually, yes, I can.
Because the decision came down from the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith and this absurd story broke right after Joey Ratz aka Pope Emeritus Benedict the 16th was called to the carpet for how he handled another scandal within the Church. And guess where he was in leadership before being appointed pope? The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith! And guess which story we are talking about instead of that? The one about a priest saying “we” instead of “I.”
I’ve had countless people reach out to me asking my opinion on the issue of the priest who incorrectly baptized thousands of people. If you aren’t aware, here is a quick recap: a Roman Catholic priest recently resigned because he said “we baptize you” instead of “I baptize you” during the sacrament. An investigation happened, and it turns out this priest has been saying it this way since his ordination. The Church has ruled the baptisms invalid.
And my opinion is: that’s silly.
Most sacraments in the Church can only be performed by a priest or bishop. For example, only a bishop can ordain a priest. Only a priest can hear confession or consecrate the bread and wine during communion. However, under extreme circumstances, any baptized person can perform a baptism.
If you were to find yourself at the scene of an accident and someone requested to be baptized, you could do it. The rules are simple: use water and say, “I baptize you in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.” Bam! Baptism.
The Church also accepts baptisms from other churches as valid. If you converted to Catholicism from a Protestant church, they would not require you to be baptized again. As long as the church believes in the trinity, baptizes with water, and does so in the name of the “Father, Son, and Holy Spirit,” that baptism is considered valid.
The reason for this is because the creed says, “we believe in one baptism,” meaning you can only be baptized the one time. To require someone to be baptized a second time would be considered heresy.
In my personal and professional opinion, this is an absurd response, and I can not find anything to justify it in canon law. The Roman Church choosing to allow the sacraments to take place in the vernacular post-Vatican II was bound to cause these types of variations in liturgical practice. Most especially for bilingual clergy, as was the case with this priest.
I can not personally find any justification for declaring these baptisms invalid; they may be illicit but not invalid. Illicit means whenever something is done outside the protocol or authority of the Church. That is how baptisms of Protestant churches are viewed, valid but illicit.
I think the response of the Church to this incident is legalistic and cruel. It is cruel both to the congregants, drawing into question the validity of their baptisms, weddings, etc., and it is cruel to this priest. And, as an aside, I find the swiftness with which they handled the alleged misuse of one word within the baptism ritual verses *gestures broadly at all other issues within the church as a whole* is just flat out appalling.
In conclusion: whether you got dunked or sprinkled, no matter the gender of the person who did it, or the words used, if you were baptized in the name of the trinity, you are baptized. Period, the end, and I can’t believe this has become such a scandal.
Actually, yes, I can.
Because the decision came down from the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith and this absurd story broke right after Joey Ratz aka Pope Emeritus Benedict the 16th was called to the carpet for how he handled another scandal within the Church. And guess where he was in leadership before being appointed pope? The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith! And guess which story we are talking about instead of that? The one about a priest saying “we” instead of “I.”
FadeToBlack&Gold
8647
The whole thing just makes them look like clowns, and yet they wonder why Church attendance in developed countries continues to dwindle every year.
Kepler
Cornell Big Red
MissThundercat
Are the cis okay?
Am I suppose to pray over leftovers?
Me: Lord, it’s me again with this spaghetti…
Me: Lord, it’s me again with this spaghetti…
MissThundercat
Are the cis okay?
I saw a preacher who spoke of the light
But there was brimstone in his throat
He'd show me the way according to him
In return for my personal check
I flipped the channel back to CNN
And I lit another cigarette
MissThundercat
Are the cis okay?
I found this poem:
Beatitudes by Kaitlin Shetler
i just want to remind you that god made people
called them good
and then drowned them in a flood
that your god
made mistakes
hardened hearts
gambled with satan
killed his son
struck down followers
and made rules for slavery
and yet you say
his judgment is sound
you
who mock women at clinics
criminalize science
persecute children
cheer war
storm capitols
in the name of god
aren’t you a pair
like father
like son
how do you drink jesus’s blood
and spill your neighbor’s
how do you baptize repentant
and drown naysayers
when did whiplash
get holy
when did abuse
get trendy
i’ve never been good
at memorizing things
but i don’t remember that
beatitude
blessed are the warmongers
for they shall find
prayers and thoughts
and blessed are the pro-lifers
for they shall find
kettles and pots
and blessed are the christians
who wave flags
and throw stones
for they will find heaven
underneath others’ bones
and i’m pretty sure the god of floods
and horsemen
loves imitation
so don’t worry
too much
you’re in fine company
but if you decide
one day
to try for decency
remember this
god may send floods
but you can build boats
dismantling pews
and using the wood
for something that will actually
save lives
Beatitudes by Kaitlin Shetler
i just want to remind you that god made people
called them good
and then drowned them in a flood
that your god
made mistakes
hardened hearts
gambled with satan
killed his son
struck down followers
and made rules for slavery
and yet you say
his judgment is sound
you
who mock women at clinics
criminalize science
persecute children
cheer war
storm capitols
in the name of god
aren’t you a pair
like father
like son
how do you drink jesus’s blood
and spill your neighbor’s
how do you baptize repentant
and drown naysayers
when did whiplash
get holy
when did abuse
get trendy
i’ve never been good
at memorizing things
but i don’t remember that
beatitude
blessed are the warmongers
for they shall find
prayers and thoughts
and blessed are the pro-lifers
for they shall find
kettles and pots
and blessed are the christians
who wave flags
and throw stones
for they will find heaven
underneath others’ bones
and i’m pretty sure the god of floods
and horsemen
loves imitation
so don’t worry
too much
you’re in fine company
but if you decide
one day
to try for decency
remember this
god may send floods
but you can build boats
dismantling pews
and using the wood
for something that will actually
save lives
MissThundercat
Are the cis okay?
International Women's Day.
Most religious leaders I know aren't sharing verses about celebrating women.
Meanwhile, Judges 4 talks about Deborah. Guy named Barak went up to her and basically says "I'm not going to fight this tyrant's army if you're not coming with me." Deborah's like "fine, I'll come with you, but you won't get any of the glory or honor after you win."
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Judges 4&version=NASB1995
Most religious leaders I know aren't sharing verses about celebrating women.
Meanwhile, Judges 4 talks about Deborah. Guy named Barak went up to her and basically says "I'm not going to fight this tyrant's army if you're not coming with me." Deborah's like "fine, I'll come with you, but you won't get any of the glory or honor after you win."
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Judges 4&version=NASB1995
- Status