attended a mass recently..not catholic..have a question

bill5 said:

Thanks cOfm, frankly I wasn't going to bother as I rarely do when people toss out Bible quotes to "support" their opinion (ie their interpretation of it). We can play that game all day long.

Again, agree to disagree with people who think loud/crying/screaming children (up to and including babies) at Mass is a wonderful thing.

Click to expand...

Perhaps the problem is you. Not only does scripture say to not prevent the children from coming to Jesus (blah blah, something something your interpretation, blah blah), we have never been to a church where the pastor or priest and several of the laity has not come to us after service to tell us to not worry about loud kids because they love the sound of kids in church and are thrilled that they are there.

I just wanted to address "not responding to someone is silent verbal abuse"

Thats like saying not hitting someone is the equivelent of a none violent form of violence.

Next time i see someone being aggresive to another person... if the other person walks away and doesnt hit him/her i am calling the cops i will not tolerate that kind of non violent violence in my neighbourhood

^

katerinah1947 said:

Hi,

Are you joking about believing that there is no salvation outside the normal definition of the Catholic Church?

If you are, your sarcasm is understood.

If not, I am confused by your not knowing, that is not true.

LOVE,

Click to expand...

"Whoever wishes to be saved, needs above all to hold the Catholic faith; unless each one preserves this whole and inviolate, he will without a doubt perish in eternity."
(Denzinger's Enchiridion Symbolorum; The Sources of Catholic Dogma; 30th edition, # 39)

In 1302 A.D., by the power invested in him, Pope Boniface VIII infallibly stated

"...we declare, say, define, and proclaim to every human creature that they by necessity for salvation are entirely subject to the Roman Pontiff."

(D.E.S.; The Sources of Catholic Dogma; 30th edition, # 469)

There are many other instances where this teaching of the church is reiterated. What is shows is that those who willingly reject the catholic faith are condemned to hell unless Jesus himself in his infinite mercy wishes to act outside of his prescribed narrow path which he himself instituted... this of course he can do but to willingly reject his church and expect mercy is in itself a abuse of the mercy of christ.

mea kulpa said:

I just wanted to address "not responding to someone is silent verbal abuse"

Thats like saying not hitting someone is the equivelent of a none violent form of violence.

Next time i see someone being aggresive to another person... if the other person walks away and doesnt hit him/her i am calling the cops i will not tolerate that kind of non violent violence in my neighbourhood

Click to expand...

Hi,

As you try and figure this out, please include this, in your thoughts to try and help you understand.

http://outofthefog.website/top-100-trait-blog/2015/11/4/the-silent-treatment

Verbal abuse, has two forms. One is silent, the other is not.

Verbal abuse has two intensities. One is severe, the other is mild.

There is actually information out there and people out there who study and know this.

For, you when this subject came up in my life for the first time, I never ever thought I was verbally abused.

I submitted myself to a test on this. Sure enough, after answering all the questions and scoring myself, I WAS NOT VERBALLY ABUSED ACCORDING TO THE TEST RESULTS.

There was a second part to that test. I took that. ACCORDING TO THOSE TEST RESULTS I WAS SEVERELY VERBALLY ABUSED.

In working out, from those years of being severely verbally abused, which all my family and friends watched, I still needed to do some more work.

One day, I was accused of being a trouble maker, of taking hurt were none was given.

He told me that I was choosing to be hurt. Sticks and stones can break my bones but names can never hurt me, he said., I was at fault. He told me so.

I spent three weeks, trying to figure this out. Being an egg-head, that is perhaps how I do everything. I hit the books when I do not know. I found nothing in three weeks study though.

I then brought this up with others. It was explained to me, how it worked. I had to explain to them first, how it was possible for me to know so much about Physics, and be totally clueless about everyday items, like verbal abuse.

The silent form was the hardest to learn. But, I did learn it.

LOVE,

Maybe we should return to topic...

mea kulpa said:

"Whoever wishes to be saved, needs above all to hold the Catholic faith; unless each one preserves this whole and inviolate, he will without a doubt perish in eternity."
(Denzinger's Enchiridion Symbolorum; The Sources of Catholic Dogma; 30th edition, # 39)

In 1302 A.D., by the power invested in him, Pope Boniface VIII infallibly stated

"...we declare, say, define, and proclaim to every human creature that they by necessity for salvation are entirely subject to the Roman Pontiff."

(D.E.S.; The Sources of Catholic Dogma; 30th edition, # 469)

There are many other instances where this teaching of the church is reiterated. What is shows is that those who willingly reject the catholic faith are condemned to hell unless Jesus himself in his infinite mercy wishes to act outside of his prescribed narrow path which he himself instituted... this of course he can do but to willingly reject his church and expect mercy is in itself a abuse of the mercy of christ.

Click to expand...

Hi,

I actually did not know this was a Catholic teaching, and it appears it is ex-cathedra, thus infallibly proclaimed.

Interesting. And, scary, if one does not trust in God, rather than his own understandings.

You are giving us Catholic teaching, and doing it well.

Here is just one snippet out of the perhaps volumes of information out there on what you have informed or re-informed some of us with. (I might actually remember this from my distant past. Sorry to have bothered you.)

https://en-gb.facebook.com/AdoremusInAeternumACatholicGathering/posts/595643823803864

Again. Sorry to have bothered you on this.

LOVE,

P.S. http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/pope-francis-good-atheists_n_3320757.html
LOVE,

P.S., P.S.

As I start to look into this, as my position differs from the ex-cathedra statements, and therefore my position, is formally wrong within Catholic Doctrine, The Council of Trent was found to be in error on one point, and other councils, I have heard, are sometimes invalidated, by other councils.

So, I will hold to the church's infallible, ex-cathedral statements, while looking into why I thought those other items would also allow a person to be okay with God, such that they too would receive what Catholics receive upon their death and resurrection.

LOVE,

aChildOfMary said:

Maybe we should return to topic...

Click to expand...

Hi,

Yes.

LOVE,

katerinah1947 said:

Hi,

I actually did not know this was a Catholic teaching, and it appears it is ex-cathedra, thus infallibly proclaimed.

Interesting. And, scary, if one does not trust in God, rather than his own understandings.

You are giving us Catholic teaching, and doing it well.

Here is just one snippet out of the perhaps volumes of information out there on what you have informed or re-informed some of us with. (I might actually remember this from my distant past. Sorry to have bothered you.)

https://en-gb.facebook.com/AdoremusInAeternumACatholicGathering/posts/595643823803864

Again. Sorry to have bothered you on this.

LOVE,

P.S. http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/pope-francis-good-atheists_n_3320757.html
LOVE,

P.S., P.S.

As I start to look into this, as my position differs from the ex-cathedra statements, and therefore my position, is formally wrong within Catholic Doctrine, The Council of Trent was found to be in error on one point, and other councils, I have heard, are sometimes invalidated, by other councils.

So, I will hold to the church's infallible, ex-cathedral statements, while looking into why I thought those other items would also allow a person to be okay with God, such that they too would receive what Catholics receive upon their death and resurrection.

LOVE,

Click to expand...

Maybe Pope Benedict xvi in his recently released interview can shed some light for you

"The missionaries of the 16th century were convinced that the unbaptized person is lost forever. After the [Second Vatican] Council, this conviction was definitely abandoned. The result was a two-sided, deep crisis. Without this attentiveness to the salvation, the Faith loses its foundation."

He also speaks of a “profound evolution of Dogma” with respect to the Dogma that there is no salvation outside the Church. This purported change of dogma has led, in the pope's eyes, to a loss of the missionary zeal in the Church – “any motivation for a future missionary commitment was removed.”

https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/p...-church-is-now-facing-a-two-sided-deep-crisis

It is clear what pope benedict xvi thinks.

This is why until a future council is held to address these issues with vatican 2. I hold fast to the traditions passed down through the ages... Its not that i reject vatican ii but until it is formally addressed i will consider v2 as was the intention of pope john xxiii as a pastoral council that has not authority of an infallible council. I also reject other all other novilties since vatcian 2 until it is made clear. While i do not reject the new mass as invalid as that would contadict the promise of our lord to protect his church i reject them as being illicit.

mea kulpa said:

"...we declare, say, define, and proclaim to every human creature that they by necessity for salvation are entirely subject to the Roman Pontiff."

(D.E.S.; The Sources of Catholic Dogma; 30th edition, # 469)

Click to expand...

And are you ENTIRELY subject to the Roman Pontiff , to Pope Francis ?

mea kulpa said:

While i do not reject the new mass as invalid as that would contadict the promise of our lord to protect his church i reject them as being illicit.

Click to expand...

But a few posts up you quote ......."...we declare, say, define, and proclaim to every human creature that they by necessity for salvation are entirely subject to the Roman Pontiff."

Note the words of your post...... ENTIRELY SUBJECT TO THE ROMAN PONTIFF .

Then you are saying that the Mass celebrated by the Roman Pontiffs Paul VI , John Paul I , John Paul II , Benedict XVI and Francis is illicit .

Get a grip on yourself , mate .

mea kulpa said:

Maybe Pope Benedict xvi in his recently released interview can shed some light for you

"The missionaries of the 16th century were convinced that the unbaptized person is lost forever. After the [Second Vatican] Council, this conviction was definitely abandoned. The result was a two-sided, deep crisis. Without this attentiveness to the salvation, the Faith loses its foundation."

He also speaks of a “profound evolution of Dogma” with respect to the Dogma that there is no salvation outside the Church. This purported change of dogma has led, in the pope's eyes, to a loss of the missionary zeal in the Church – “any motivation for a future missionary commitment was removed.”

https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/p...-church-is-now-facing-a-two-sided-deep-crisis

It is clear what pope benedict xvi thinks.

This is why until a future council is held to address these issues with vatican 2. I hold fast to the traditions passed down through the ages... Its not that i reject vatican ii but until it is formally addressed i will consider v2 as was the intention of pope john xxiii as a pastoral council that has not authority of an infallible council. I also reject other all other novilties since vatcian 2 until it is made clear. While i do not reject the new mass as invalid as that would contadict the promise of our lord to protect his church i reject them as being illicit.

Click to expand...

Hi,

Interestingly enough, I was called on by an old Roman Catholic Priest, to read Vatican II, and tell him what I thought of it from my normal level of working back in those days.

He was not going to leave me alone, until I did that for him.

I did that finally, it took awhile, as I needed time on one item.

Later on, after reporting in, he was satisfied.

I was surprised back then to be told, that I must read Vatican II, in order for a priest to do his job. His job for God.

LOVE,

Mea Kulpa

I'm sitting here wondering just how on earth any Catholic [ Latin/RC ] can actually post the way you have just done in Holy Week.

Your thoughts and attention should be directed towards the events unfolding during this time

mea kulpa said:

Maybe Pope Benedict xvi in his recently released interview can shed some light for you

"The missionaries of the 16th century were convinced that the unbaptized person is lost forever. After the [Second Vatican] Council, this conviction was definitely abandoned. The result was a two-sided, deep crisis. Without this attentiveness to the salvation, the Faith loses its foundation."

He also speaks of a “profound evolution of Dogma” with respect to the Dogma that there is no salvation outside the Church. This purported change of dogma has led, in the pope's eyes, to a loss of the missionary zeal in the Church – “any motivation for a future missionary commitment was removed.”

https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/p...-church-is-now-facing-a-two-sided-deep-crisis

It is clear what pope benedict xvi thinks.

This is why until a future council is held to address these issues with vatican 2. I hold fast to the traditions passed down through the ages... Its not that i reject vatican ii but until it is formally addressed i will consider v2 as was the intention of pope john xxiii as a pastoral council that has not authority of an infallible council. I also reject other all other novilties since vatcian 2 until it is made clear. While i do not reject the new mass as invalid as that would contadict the promise of our lord to protect his church i reject them as being illicit.

Click to expand...

You're dangerously close to having a SSPX mindset so please take my advice, step carefully and I say this with love.

Anhelyna said:

Mea Kulpa

I'm sitting here wondering just how on earth any Catholic [ Latin/RC ] can actually post the way you have just done in Holy Week.

Your thoughts and attention should be directed towards the events unfolding during this time

Click to expand...

Hi,

Then I will withdraw, for I have offended you.

Goodbye, and I am sorry to have upset you.

LOVE,

Not you Katerinah - the poster called mea kulpa who has suggested that the Masses celebrated now are illicit

Anhelyna said:

Not you Katerinah - the poster called mea kulpa who has suggested that the Masses celebrated now are illicit

Click to expand...

Hi,

Many apologies. I did think that you meant me.

I see my error now. I am sorry.


LOVE,

katerinah1947 said:

Hi,

Many apologies. I did think that you meant me.

I see my error now. I am sorry.


LOVE,

Click to expand...

Relax sweetheart.
Walk in peace.

aChildOfMary said:

Relax sweetheart.
Walk in peace.

Click to expand...

Hi,

Tears. Nice ones. I don't know why yet.

LOVE,

MikeK said:

Whenever I notice loud children, smelly adults, unskilled singers, musicians or speakers, people wearing clothes that strike me at first as inapropriate, or whatever, I try to thank the Lord that they bothered to show up. It is a wonderful moment to focus on our humility.

Click to expand...

You could take a shower before you showed up. Sheesh.