rdalin

Why do you think that:
a) Catholics are not Christians?
b) Catholics will become Christians?

From my standpoint, Christians are Christians, regardless of the particular sect they're a member of.

[ December 20, 2002: Message edited by: rdalin ]</p>

Amos

</strong>

Good point! I am of the opinion that the Church of those days was the right Church and we have the abundance of spiritual wealth to speak for this. Such heights of civilization has never been equalled -- nor will it ever-- and in fact, we now face the problem that the Church itself must deal with problems that are caused from outside the Church. Yes, that's it, as if it no longer is able to move the world but is moved by the world. </strong>

It doesn't matter. Wrong is wrong and since there is only one Church the rest will all carve their own little niche in hell. </strong>

Good, I have to read it first. Care to elaborate or is it just there for me to read? </strong>

Well, it is obvious that reason did not prevail and that he was driven by his emotions. From there he could never judge the motivations of the Church to see with clarity the cause behind the glory of the Church that had brought him home thusfar. No thanks. I like religion but am not religious.

MrDarwin

Just curious, Amos--are you the Catholic Church's idea of a Catholic?

Amos

You have to understand that "Christian" is not just a self proclaimed ideal (idol). Christians are solitary individuals who cannot belong to a religion or there would be temples in the New Jerusalem. Catholics are sinners and have the confessionals to prove this. As for the rest? They are just fooling themselves and many of those who are honest with themselves will end up here as atheist.

Amos

The Church is big and is divided between the Church Millitant, the Church suffering and the Church Triumphant. These represent various stages of maturity, we can say, and will be identified by those who journey in the Church as the Church.

MrDarwin

god-free, you do realize that there's no such thing as an objective history of anything?

What is your interest in the Catholic church, and what are you trying to find out? There are several II members, both theists and non-theists, with a good knowledge of Catholicism and its history.

Vorkosigan

God-free,
On WWII, no standard work on the Catholic Church's role is yet in existence. There are some sensationalist books by journalists like John Cornwall.

Ther's nothing wrong with Cornwall's book. It's a fine work, but because it condemns Pius the XII, who was a serious shit, Bede, a Catholic, feels compelled to reject it. Rather than attack it directly, Bede feels the better strategy is to slander it as "sensationlist." The book itself is not sensationalist, but it certainly caused a sensation. Don't get confused.

In any case, Bede is right in one sense. Even the standard works are infested with Catholic apologetics -- the Oxford History of WWII entry on Catholic Church was written by the Church's spokesman in Britain! The non-academic standard works such as Toland's or Shirer's rarely cover the Church's activities in the war in any depth or detail.

Some of the stuff on the Holocaust does a better job of discussing the various Christian Churches' role in opposing, standing by, and aiding and abetting. You might look there instead. Martin Grant, Lucy Davidowicz, Goldhagen and Cornwall are all good places to start.

Vorkosigan

[ December 20, 2002: Message edited by: Vorkosigan ]</p>

sullster

Amos, how many times do I have to say it. Martin Luther and his Reformation saved the Catholic Church. If it hadn't been for that thick skulled German peasant monk, your Catholic church would have fallen apart under the rule of the Soprano, I mean Medici or Borgia Popes who ran the church as a crime family. The corruption would have ended it.

That we are stuck with your religion and the Protestant versions is because of the wars fought between the two twisted cults resulted in highly organised versions. You both won and the West is stuck with entrenched Christian cults.

Thanks a lot Marty Luther. You could have just let the catholics rot in their corruption and crime. No, you had to start a pure form of biblical based sects which rejected the idolatry and superstitions of the catholics. NOw were are stuck with all this crap.

Amos

Well that still does not mean that Luther was right but maybe that is why they never burned him at the stake. You think?

Hail

Organizied religion has failed to assist the world to be of the peace and harmony which is a prerequsit for life to function beyond this piont of human devlopement. No amount of aligning ones self with a chriot which is going to swing low and relieve you of your resposibility which is easily within your potential will preserve life in humanoid form. Life will continue still but in a different lifeform. For any thinking of legitamacy by virture of longevity, having started somethng, being the original ect consider this: Once an organization achieves it's goal that organization is no longer needed. For an organzation to be around for a very long time tells you of it's effectiveness toward it's mandate.
Still I think that to throw out religion would be throwing out the baby with the bath water. I think it would be a lot of work to organize groupings of people starting from scratch with new beliefs. I think that instead or reinventing the wheel it would be easier to repair religion. Which I guess may be the conclusion some doubious ancient rulers came to as well but, Oh well.
You can't change anyone but your self though and when you change others can change. Religion can adapt and reflect the level of enlightenment the people are ready for. We have to choose if we want to carve out a world with Fear/Bombs or Love.
There is no one waiting for you at the exit gate who has any inclination to put you on trial for any thing. You are tied to the results you scare-up that does the job and also helps us to progress not burn in flames forever without anything benifitial from the act. All goes forward and on higher. The progress we have made over the ages could just as well been made in the twinkleing of an eye but six or two thousand years is still not even a blip on the radar scren of eternity. If there is other life in the universe they are not physically present around here. So if there is other animated life out there. That means we are such a rare jewel among species and so worth preserving for our universe. That is how I see it.