Submission.

[katerinah1947]

You still have not shown where the movement of the universe is a matter of faith. In other words, the hierarchy can be wrong in matters of other than faith.
And again, the truth is that Galileo was instructed not to teach what he taught as fact, and would have been fine had he done so, because he could not prove it.

1.) Hi, if you cannot figure out they delved into science, and said that science is a matter of faith from those words, the words they put there, then I am stunned by you. Purely stunned. It is not the first time they would do that. They did that on Evolution. Why go on. If you cannot understand their words put them in error..... That is impossible for me to understand how you don't get it, you don't understand. Please read that again.

2.) It does not matter what you were told, look at the words. Look at the words. Did they lie? Yes, if I submit to anyone of authority, I will not be punished. They used words, and those words say what they did, what they thought and why. If they did otherwise, wrote that politically, then they lied. Which do you prefer, a mistake or a lie, signed by the Pope, and in an unananamous decision, that what is totally true, they said was not, by their higher authority and understanding of Scripture.

LOVE,
...Katie., .... .

 

[katerinah1947]

Please do not pressume to second guess what I meant iydm. I'm sure you must know that is exactly what I meant Knowing within yourself what fits the full picture is important so as not to swallow whatever is being fed cart blanche. Of course that goes for any denomination or person upon which a learning experience of biblical things is occuring. In the final accounting each will stand alone at the judgement.
When there are libraries of books that need to be gone thru to find mistakes that are obvious or carefully hidden, the most useful time spent would be to threw it all out and begin with what ALL denominations agree upon to be the truth. That is starting with the baby and leaving out the dirty bathwater.

Hi,
1.) In agreeing with you, how did I insult you.
2.) Did I not understand you correctly?
3.) I do not know what you meant apparently, otherwise you would not have objected.
4.) I agree totally with your last statement, except for adding two things. Add The Laws made by God for the non-religious world, that God said we must also obey because they are His Laws. Romans 13 1-5. Add science as God commaned is to do, in that blessing of Subdue the Earth, given to us, in Genesis.

If we start over, assuming all that is wrong is uncorrectable, then you are right, but adding Science and adding the laws of God given to civlians, and adding the law God put in our hearts and adding the law God put into our minds, that is what has to be put together, in oder to start with the Bably.
I was not disagreeing with you, and I am sorry I hurt you, and I am sorry, but I really did not and do not unerstand what you said I missed.
LOVE,
...Katie., .... .

 

[MoreCoffee]

It was a church court that condemned Galileo on matters dealing with a theory about the way the solar system worked. And since in Rome the church's courts were also the civil courts, because the papal states were governed by the church and there was no other civil authority in Rome at that time, Galileo was tried for crimes related to disturbing the peace of the state as well as upsetting some politically important theologians of his day. The issue was is the universe working as Ptolemy said or as Copernicus said and has Galileo crossed a boundary in disturbing the peace etcetera? Galileo lost his case. The church court was wrong on some points and especially on the matter of Ptolemy Vs Copernicus.

Church courts are not infallible. Nor is the way the solar system works a dogma of the church. In fact solar system orbits versus crystalline spheres is a matter for mathematicians and astronomers (or astrologers in the sixteenth century) rather than theologians. So, all things considered, Galileo was victim to the politics and rivalries of his day rather than church dogma of the day.

Should Galileo have submitted to church authority? Obviously he should have, not for conscience's sake nor for maintaining of the gospel truth nor for maintaining his religious faith intact but simply because the church authority in Rome at that times was also the civil authority and his freedom and possibly his life was at stake. The court was wrong. Courts are often wrong. But this is far from a matter of the Church's infallible extraordinary magisterium. It's a matter of civil order and propagating ideas regarded as subversive. The time for Galileo's ideas was not yet, it took a little while for the Copernican system to receive wide acceptance.

As far as I can tell this matter is outside the scope of submission to the presbyters and bishops of the Church for conscience's sake. And since the topic of this thread is submission to the presbyters and bishops of the Church for conscience's sake we seem to be a little off topic as long as we pursue this theme.

 

[katerinah1947]

Could you point that out to me? The Church is not a democracy-you and I don't get a vote.

Hi,
" from the bishops to the last of the faithful." Article 92

INFALLIBILITY: The gift of the Holy Spirit to the Church whereby the pastors of the Church, the pope and bishops in union with him, can definitively proclaim a doctrine of faith or morals for the belief of the faithful (891). This gift is related to the inability of the whole body of the faithful to err in matters of faith and morals (92).

891 “The Roman Pontiff, head of the college of bishops, enjoys this infallibility in virtue of his office, when, as supreme pastor and teacher of all the faithful—who confirms his brethren in the faith—he proclaims by a definitive act a doctrine pertaining to faith or morals.... The infallibility promised to the Church is also present in the body of bishops when, together with Peter’s successor, they exercise the supreme Magisterium,” above all in an Ecumenical Council. When the Church through its supreme Magisterium proposes a doctrine “for belief as being divinely revealed,” and as the teaching of Christ, the definitions “must be adhered to with the obedience of faith.” This infallibility extends as far as the deposit of divine Revelation itself.

92 “The whole body of the faithful... cannot err in matters of belief. This characteristic is shown in the supernatural appreciation of faith (sensus fidei) on the part of the whole people, when, ‘from the bishops to the last of the faithful,’ they manifest a universal consent in matters of faith and morals.”

LOVE,
...Katie., .... .

 

[Citizen of the Kingdom]

Hi,
1.) In agreeing with you, how did I insult you.
2.) Did I not understand you correctly?
3.) I do not know what you meant apparently, otherwise you would not have objected.
4.) I agree totally with your last statement, except for adding two things. Add The Laws made by God for the non-religious world, that God said we must also obey because they are His Laws. Romans 13 1-5. Add science as God commaned is to do, in that blessing of Subdue the Earth, given to us, in Genesis.

If we start over, assuming all that is wrong is uncorrectable, then you are right, but adding Science and adding the laws of God given to civlians, and adding the law God put in our hearts and adding the law God put into our minds, that is what has to be put together, in oder to start with the Bably.
I was not disagreeing with you, and I am sorry I hurt you, and I am sorry, but I really did not and do not unerstand what you said I missed.
LOVE,
...Katie., .... .

You sound remarkably like another poster who I had on ignor so for that reason I will unsubscribe.

 

[katerinah1947]

It was a church court that condemned Galileo on matters dealing with a theory about the way the solar system worked. And since in Rome the church's courts were also the civil courts, because the papal states were governed by the church and there was no other civil authority in Rome at that time, Galileo was tried for crimes related to disturbing the peace of the state as well as upsetting some politically important theologians of his day. The issue was is the universe working as Ptolemy said or as Copernicus said and has Galileo crossed a boundary in disturbing the peace etcetera? Galileo lost his case. The church court was wrong on some points and especially on the matter of Ptolemy Vs Copernicus.

Church courts are not infallible. Nor is the way the solar system works a dogma of the church. In fact solar system orbits versus crystalline spheres is a matter for mathematicians and astronomers (or astrologers in the sixteenth century) rather than theologians. So, all things considered, Galileo was victim to the politics and rivalries of his day rather than church dogma of the day.

Should Galileo have submitted to church authority? Obviously he should have, not for conscience's sake nor for maintaining of the gospel truth nor for maintaining his religious faith intact but simply because the church authority in Rome at that times was also the civil authority and his freedom and possibly his life was at stake. The court was wrong. Courts are often wrong. But this is far from a matter of the Church's infallible extraordinary magisterium. It's a matter of civil order and propagating ideas regarded as subversive. The time for Galileo's ideas was not yet, it took a little while for the Copernican system to receive wide acceptance.

As far as I can tell this matter is outside the scope of submission to the presbyters and bishops of the Church for conscience's sake. And since the topic of this thread is submission to the presbyters and bishops of the Church for conscience's sake we seem to be a little off topic as long as we pursue this theme.

Hi,
Yes, and I was right on you. What you have given us here is not only much, it is beyond the capacity of even me now.
As far as for getting back on topic let me say this. One day, I am approached by a priest. He asked me to do something. I knew he was wrong. I immediately started to object and then did, but almost as instantly stopped and said yes sir, in effect. I did that because right or wrong, that is what the Bible says we are to do. Jesus said that. Don't be like them, but do everything they tell you to do.
He did not speak those words because they were holier, than you and I. He spoke those words for us to use forever. I submit, when it is an order. Jesus told us to.
Those priests of the Temple were fairly horrible back then. Some of the Priests, and the Protestand ministers are horrible today. We can leave, not to be under their pretentions and bombasts, but when given a direct order, it is Jesus who said we must obey, even if it results in our death. Even then.
In a way that was Galileo's issue, and all the other things said about him were true also. Everything it seems that even MrLessCoffee said, as I can't imagine him needing more coffee with his abilities so clearly dispayed here really, I have heard.
One item against him was he could not explain two tides every day, under his theory. We can today. The only thing, Mr LessCoffeePleaseForTheRestOfUsToCatchUpToYou, is the words they published, expecially with their earlier words about being correct with Scripture, says to me either they were totally wrong on their understanding of Scripture to the level they said they did, or else they lied to protect the public, which a lot of Politicians, Doctors and others do. But, to know those words today, who can say if they lied because they thought they had to, or if they truly made an error scriturally. To me those words are unfortunate.
LOVE,
...Katherina., .... .

 

[Rick Otto]

Katherine, you are a complete joy to read, and I must say I admire your devotion to the baby despite being deeply over your head in the bathwater.

I too was stunned at the bald faced denial of the wedding of science and faith in cause for arrest.

Similarly, I am often perplexed at efforts to baffle with complexity.

Lady, you really class up this joint.

 

[sunlover1]

Katherine, you are a complete joy to read, and I must say I admire your devotion to the baby despite being deeply over your head in the bathwater.

I too was stunned at the bald faced denial of the wedding of science and faith in cause for arrest.

Similarly, I am often perplexed at efforts to baffle with complexity.

Lady, you really class up this joint.

 

[katerinah1947]

Katherine, you are a complete joy to read, and I must say I admire your devotion to the baby despite being deeply over your head in the bathwater.

I too was stunned at the bald faced denial of the wedding of science and faith in cause for arrest.

Similarly, I am often perplexed at efforts to baffle with complexity.

Lady, you really class up this joint.

Hi,
Ah! Wedding. Gorgeous words to mankind, if mankind would just say yes.
Very clearly they killed Joan of Arc. Notice who they killed. Notice who killed them. Although off the topic, does that sound to you, like they understood their own Bible fully? Maybe they did though, because so much perfection and the words of Jesus are in That Church. Maybe they do understand and those other words of Scripture apply. My church will not fail, is the meaning, the actual words I cannot find right now.
On Science and submission, did not God give a blessing in Genesis. Was that blessing not, Subdue The Earth? Is not a blessing by God a Command as is known and proved really in the Tower of Babylon incident? Did not God cause them to spread? Did He, God not say that twice? Since they could no longer understand each other, of course they cannot work together to stay in one place, as they were trying to do. God forced the Command of His Blessing Given to Noah's Children when they got off the Ark. "Fill the earth" that was part of God's Blessing to those who came off the Ark. Then some didn't. They God confused their language. Then they spread.
That is the way, I understand that. A blessing by God is also a Command. Sure the Blessing from God, might or does mean to us and to God, that in what He has Commanded us to do, that He implies He will also help us, as that is His Will. And that last part was off the point, of a Blessing is a Command.
A Blessing by God is a command to me, and so Science was Commanded by God, to be done, in Genesis.
Marriage in this case is merely saying yes to God, on following His Orders, and without choice, there can be no marriage. Yet, that last part is off topic also. Your analogy is perfect, as you used it.
In your terminology, should science and religion marry? I ask you a few more marriage analogy questions, if you will allow me to. Should Philosophy, which is already in a romance with Science, that is not working out too well for Philosophy, but where what is true in Philosophy, has been so benificial to Science, that science will never divorce and forget Philosophy, as the to are wed, forever. Science has separated due to the bad actions of Philosophy, but Science can never throw her/him away, and not die.
I once used God, in my science work, and when I had graduated from Technician Role, to advanced Scientist role, but without the paperwork. Oddly enough to me and probably to all of you, do you know it is capability over credentials, that make a scientist? They sure had to convince me, everytime in the beginning. Now I say it. I did not say it back then. I did not believe it. One day, and maybe a few more, that is and was proven to me. This part is off topic.
On topic, is one day I used God. All my work was done. In review...ARGH!. ARGH, argh, argh, arghm argh. I had missed a needed data point. Ugh! Three more months of misery. Three. I would have to turn off all of my emotions once again, for three months. Emotions are killed while doing the actual work in Science. Argh! For some reason, and I have never done this since or before, I knew God in a certain way now. That way applied to the problem. I wrote down the answer and presented it. Did it work? Did all the other data points work? All of the data points I had determined by extensive emotioanal displacements and accuracy, were totally correct. BUT, that point used from having known something about God, ,,,,,that data point, that point used by just asking what God would do, that data point used because in that way, the way I used God, I had calibrated God, so I knew what that data point would be, and OF COURSE it worked. Expcept then I had a problem.
My problem was how can I cite my sources. No one in Science ever takes credit for things procurred from others. I cite them. We cite them. Now, roughly 25 years ago, in this world, just how could I cite God, when back then, God is the new Heresy? How? I didn't, and couldn't back then. Now, I can. Now I would. Then I was actually too new in God.
So using your terms of marry. Yes science is married to Philosophy, and yes religion should ask and marry science.
I am sorry, I have said nothing on your nice words to God. You said me. I am nothing apart from Him. If you like anything here, think God, thank God, not me. I just love Him. And if I did not have God, None of this would be here. So, I see you are impressed by Him. That fills my heart with joy, and my eyes with tears. I will cry later.
LOVE and love,
...Mary Katherine., .... .

 

[katerinah1947]

Katherine, you are a complete joy to read, and I must say I admire your devotion to the baby despite being deeply over your head in the bathwater.

I too was stunned at the bald faced denial of the wedding of science and faith in cause for arrest.

Similarly, I am often perplexed at efforts to baffle with complexity.

Lady, you really class up this joint.

Hi, Rick,
When a lady is defended assuming I am one, you can always tell as she is entirely pleased. When a guy comes out of the blue, and sees an injustice against a lady then defends her, by ways that she cannot, you can always tell if the lady is a lady, by how grateful she is, and awed.
I have not enough A's to type all the times, I would like to, in order to handle my awe of you, which I actually missed, until I stopped typing earlier and lay down.
I also am so pleased, that I cannot approach you personally, as I might do something in response, (Hugs Kisses and tears), and then your mate might get the wrong ideas about me.
I need once in awhile to be defended. Thanks for being a guy. I will now tell SunLover1 the same thing, but gender specifically. I also did not realize why you wrote what you did, nor why she wrote what she did also.
I love God, and the warriors he puts on earth. You are that and more. You are a warrior of God.
LOVE and love,
...Katie., .... .

 

[katerinah1947]

Hi Dear,
I'm sorry I missed this earlier. I was so choked up by what he said that when you posted, I needed time to handle things.
I still will need two more days to get over his nice words and your words also. Thank you both.
LOVE and love,
...Katherine., .... .

 

[MoreCoffee]

One ought to remember that the holy catholic church is a lady

 

[Rick Otto]

Hi, Rick,
When a lady is defended assuming I am one, you can always tell as she is entirely pleased. When a guy comes out of the blue, and sees an injustice against a lady then defends her, by ways that she cannot, you can always tell if the lady is a lady, by how grateful she is, and awed.
I have not enough A's to type all the times, I would like to, in order to handle my awe of you, which I actually missed, until I stopped typing earlier and lay down.
I also am so pleased, that I cannot approach you personally, as I might do something in response, (Hugs Kisses and tears), and then your mate might get the wrong ideas about me.
I need once in awhile to be defended. Thanks for being a guy. I will now tell SunLover1 the same thing, but gender specifically. I also did not realize why you wrote what you did, nor why she wrote what she did also.
I love God, and the warriors he puts on earth. You are that and more. You are a warrior of God.
LOVE and love,
...Katie., .... .

Relax and enjoy the moment.
Let's be here for awhile.
Spare those pearls. We may have a long way to go.

 

[katerinah1947]

One ought to remember that the holy catholic church is a lady

Hi,
And now for you also, dear defender of the Faith. She is a woman sure, I say far more beautiful and serene than any of us on earth. I say you are right, she feels like Mary to me right now.
Within that church, in the halls and ways and rooms of God, I will share this, it is as requested, by a priest made so by Jesus, in the order of Melchizedek. Yes the is the only third one I have ever heard of. Melchizedek was of course the first and king and priest of Salem. Jesus is the second, I think. You can all help me out here if you want to. This man has a name that I am unallowed to share, but it is so, Jesus personally made him one.
What you are about to hear, is made possible by the church Jesus put on earth. She is all she is and more. Here is that more for Sunday, Easter Sunday, for me.
............. ... . ................. ................... ....................
First of all, welcome thee, all who wander, for today the Lord is Risen. For the past week, we have lived the Mysteries of Faith in the consumation of the Scripture. Last Sunday, we receved the Lord in Jerusalem, greeted Him with Palms and open hearts. On Holy Thuesday, we stood by Him at the Last Supper, our feet were washed by His holy hands and toguether with the Apostoles, we waited as the Lord prayed in Gesthermane. We followed His trial, punishment and execution. For what? Civil resistence? Or heralding something so great that it would destabilize the known world? We stood by the Cross and followed Joseph of Arimathea and Mary Magdalene as He was laid in Joseph's stone hewed tomb. We cried and regretted as the Lord went down to the Mansions of the Dead, unknowing that He had to rest from His labors and free those who came before us for the Mercy of the Lord is great.

And now, we can rejoice.

Today is a joyfull day, and the Lord has risen from the Grave in all His glory. Let us raise our hearts with Him as well and praise the Lord for He is Mercifull. Let our words of prayer comfort Jesus by showing the Lord that now, 1982 years later, that there is still some of His Light in Mankind's hearts.

And now, after our prayers have been made....let us help spread this light to others by doing good deeds and helping then.

................ ... . .................. .................. .................

And that was all. That is the first sermon/homily of his.
LOVE and love,
...Mary Katherine., .... .