Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Yeah, that's true. I think people get worked up about baby seals and global warming because they feel the need for some larger purpose which they otherwise don't experience.
Isn't part of the “castration of Europe” also a function of the pendulum of racial/ethnic tolerance issue? With Hitler the pendulum swung to an extreme attitude which led to the deaths of millions, and now in response it has swung the other way so that even showing a swastika in Germany and Austria is illegal (this idea sounds strange as an American). Has political correctness – and the fear of tapping into Nazi-esque ideas which fall upon ethnic lines – prevented Europe from addressing problems which nevertheless are emerging around ethnic lines involving Muslims?
Why not? Unless you already had other things published with a company, it's probably not a bad idea to publish yourself. From what I have heard, even with an agent, it's not easy to have a work picked up by a publisher. Honestly, you'd probably get a wider audience quicker by self-publishing, and perhaps based on that someone could see it and decide to publish future works of yours. Actually, let me modify this. I think that if the work is fiction, then self-publishing is a much better idea. If it is non-fiction, then maybe not.
Yes. I tried making so that the + sign prevented it from being posted to Twitter, but for some reason that didn't work. So for now, just put OT and it won't send out the tweet. Posts get refreshed every 1/2 hour or so, so if you want to modify the subject line to remove the OT later on, you can do that.Also, posts in the Roman Senate Chamber never get tweeted anyway, so don't worry about those.
Another thing about resting – I think it's good not only for muscles to be repaired, but also for general aches associated with weight lifting. For example, in the past my knees have ached when increasing my squat weight, and I've had muscle pain in my pectoral muscles while doing bench press. I think that ligaments or other joint parts can just get sore and they take more than a few days to recover.Incidentally, in years past, when I increased my bench press to near 300 lbs. I tended to get pain in my shoulder which would prevent me from doing higher weight. This time around, I have decided to increase my weight more gradually, so rather than maxing out every time I decided to make sure I could bench press 225 lbs. x 10 before I started going up much higher. I figured it would help to build up and strengthen everything in my upper body to prevent injury. So far I think it's helped, and I have been able to max out at about 285 lbs., but I'm still concerned about injury if I go too fast.
Alright, so I just saw a report on CNN which interviewed a lesbian Catholic woman “married” and with a child. The report told how she was raised a Catholic and liked Catholicism and how she felt hope after Pope Francis' statement. My reaction: on one hand, the media report was ridiculous since it distorted the Pope's message, and it also conveyed a misunderstanding of Church doctrine. And if the woman was willing to defy the Church's teachings by “marrying” another woman, why does she care what the Catholic Church's view of her actions are?On the other hand, it is positive that people in the homosexual community recognize they are not meant to be ostracized but are invited back into the Church. This does not mean that they are meant to retain sinful ways, but that there is hope and mercy with God.Perhaps Pope Francis will expound more on this matter in the near future to stem some of the distortions taken from his interview.
Note: I split this topic off the privacy topic since it seemed like it could veer off anyway, and I am kind of interested in discussing health care now that is starting.What I really want to see/hear is the response of the Occupy Wall Street crowd and others like them who are asked about whether they knew that they are going to have to pay the fine if they don't buy health insurance. I imagine that many 20-somethings don't buy it on their own (I didn't have it for a number of years because I didn't want to spend the money) and will be faced with the shock of getting fined over it.
Haven't most popes spoken against the love of money though?
Well, not just the popes....1 Tim 6:10....now why is this controversial? Scout, I get the feeling that politics or cynicism has consumed your perspective. I don't know how you can say that Pope Francis is "unfit" when the College of Cardinals - who are presumably much wiser in the government of the Church than any of us outsiders - elected him. What if this is exactly the message the Holy Spirit wanted to send forth at this time in history?I think when we hear American politicians speak, we understand them in light of American history and politics. This is not the case when we hears other world leaders speak. What is plaguing the world is not necessarily what is plaguing America. What may sound "liberal" to our American ears may be a legitimate message on a more global scale.As an American, I can say that capitalism is the best system we've got and that it is much better than socialism. But are there dangers in any economic system - capitalist, socialist, or otherwise? Certainly. Is it good in the world that more and more wealth is concentrating into the hands of fewer people? From a practical perspective, I don't think so. Ideally, we should want some level of wealth to be shared by many, which helps raise society as a whole rather than a few who are powerful and able to control it. Now, is it moral for massive wealth to be held by the few? I don't know that this is immoral, except it is certainly immoral for gains to be made through immoral means (effectively making this out to be worship of money). Also, even if massive wealth was gained morally, the rich have a duty to help the poor, to protect their workers, and so forth. Have the rich been gaining wealth immorally or neglecting the poor? Probably. It may not be a new problem in the scheme of recent history, but it may be one that needs to be pointed out. If not Pope Francis, then who?
What do you mean they are “saying the same thing”? Tell me your honest answer – how do you interpret the paragraphs I quoted above in light of his larger interview? Do you think he really gave liberals a cause for “celebration”? The only real way I could see that is if he somehow stated it was not immoral to engage in homosexual sex or have abortions or use contraception.
So long as you accept this. I didn't know if you would be miffed at the “lack of respect” given to your team, even though I have to admit that it is enjoying a cream puff schedule this year. I'm actually kind of surprised that they would have agreed to it, unless it were done several years ago before they started getting good.
Not that I have heard yet. One would think, however, that he will reaffirm doctrine on those hot button issues in the future. But keep in mind that the pope speaks to the world, and so if there is distortion in a few places of the American media, it might be overblown. I think it will be more important how the bishops react to it and other theologians. You are probably right, though, that there will be enough concern to merit a response by the Pope in some form, at some point in time (though probably not in a press release).
Thank you for the link to the whole interview. Yet again, it seems that when we hear filtered stories on the Pope's remarks through the media, the meaning is distorted. It is a lengthy article (around 10,000 words when I did a count), so I searched for where “abortion” came up. It showed up three times, all in this context:
“This is also the great benefit of confession as a sacrament: evaluating case by case and discerning what is the best thing to do for a person who seeks God and grace. The confessional is not a torture chamber, but the place in which the Lord’s mercy motivates us to do better. I also consider the situation of a woman with a failed marriage in her past and who also had an abortion. Then this woman remarries, and she is now happy and has five children. That abortion in her past weighs heavily on her conscience and she sincerely regrets it. She would like to move forward in her Christian life. What is the confessor to do?“We cannot insist only on issues related to abortion, gay marriage and the use of contraceptive methods. This is not possible. I have not spoken much about these things, and I was reprimanded for that. But when we speak about these issues, we have to talk about them in a context. The teaching of the church, for that matter, is clear and I am a son of the church, but it is not necessary to talk about these issues all the time.“The dogmatic and moral teachings of the church are not all equivalent. The church’s pastoral ministry cannot be obsessed with the transmission of a disjointed multitude of doctrines to be imposed insistently. Proclamation in a missionary style focuses on the essentials, on the necessary things: this is also what fascinates and attracts more, what makes the heart burn, as it did for the disciples at Emmaus.
Wow - does this sound at all like someone who wants to start saying "who cares?" about abortion, sexual vice, etc.? No, it does not seem that way to me at all. From what he stated, and the context of his statement, it simply seems as if he wants to provide the broader message of the Gospels, which includes instructions on sexual morality but which is so much more as a whole. Some people - especially on the outside - may want to reduce Catholicism to a set of sexual rules, but this misses the overall message. If Catholics (especially those on the fringes of the Catholic community) constantly hear a message of "don't do this, don't do that", the Catholic Church runs the risk of keeping those people away even though the true message should be one which draws them in. Look, I don't think it's a surprise that liberal Catholic groups will try to distort this into making others think it's ok to sodomize or whatever now. And of course those groups will be given a voice in the media. My advice: take what they say with a grain of salt. The last paragraph on the first page of that "Liberals take heart" article was a good response to them:
The Catholic Association, however, said the pope was simply telling his flock to remember to first express Christian love in their lives.“The pope is not in any way proposing that the church should abandon important moral and social teachings. Rather, the pope is reaffirming a longstanding teaching that reaches all the way back to the founding of Christianity: love your neighbor,” senior fellow Ashley McGuire said.
I just read it after you mentioned it. I think he is trying to promote the Catholic Church in a light that is different from the past, but not in a way that departs from its doctrines. Based on my understanding, back in the day (and even leading up to today), Catholicism could be perceived as if it's mostly a set of heavy prohibitions or rules that believers must navigate through life if they want to be found worthy. This misses the point, however, of what it means to life the Christian life in its fullness. It seems that Pope Francis wants to continue to move beyond the older way of thinking by emphasizing other aspects of the Catholic faith. I do not think the Pope would ever claim that he is trying to invalidate doctrine. However, watch out if the mainstream media runs with this in a way that makes it seem as if this is so.
