What has become very population in the Catholic Church are the 'eulogies' at funeral Masses. It is wrong to eulogize at the Mass. None of us know where that place is our loved one has gone and the funeral Mass is to remember the mercies of God and pray for the soul of the deceased. Erroneously we are getting the message that ALL have gone onto a better place. Not so - not all will go to that better place and at the funderal is a good time to remember that Christ died for us all, but we have the option to accept or deny Him. Yes, there can be a death bed experience and none know, even Adolf Hilter might be feasting at the Lord's table.
Since Vatican II eulogies at Mass began and now there are some attempts to correct the activity.
* * * * * * * * Without traditional regular moral principles that may be consulted confidently, justice cannot long endure anywhere.
Posts: 6275 | Location: Maine | Registered: 31 December 2005
Of course they will. The Pope said there isn't a hell and he should know. I believe him.
It's what the drive-by dinosaur media wanted to hear, KennyMac. They took sound bites and ran with it. They who would rather report endlessly senseless things, they contrive and twist what is not of any transcendental value and actually have a hatred of the Divine and natural law.
* * * * * * * * Without traditional regular moral principles that may be consulted confidently, justice cannot long endure anywhere.
Posts: 6275 | Location: Maine | Registered: 31 December 2005
GG, there is no such thing as hell. it was a scare tactic devised by the romain catholic church to keep control over the masses. think about it:
in order for the church to exert control and KEEP control over people, it had to devise a way to keep those people fixated on what it said. so they invented hell. if you disobey the all powerful church, you will suffer for eternity in a giant lake of fire.
without this scare tactic, what was keeping the majority of the church followers from doing their own thing? absolutely nothing!! so now, with the fear of going to 'hell' in the minds of the people, the church can tell them almost anything. pay your tithes or go to hell!! confess all your sins or go to hell!! go to mass or go to hell!!
funny how hell is not even mentioned once in the old testiment of the bible. it is only with the advent of the catholic church and the new testiment that hell appears in scripture. differnt era, same scare tactic.
fast forward to the present and now u have bush using the same fear factor. only this time, instead of hell, he uses the overused mushroom cloud fear. we must fight them overseas or they will explode a bomb in america!! we must limit american liberties to secure the homeland!! we must invade non threatening nations before they threaten us!! sound familiar GG?
hitler used the same fear tactics to gain the support of the german people in WW2, including (not a shock here) the present day pope. funny how its all connected!
how many people has your god commanded you to kill today GG?
------------------------------------------ debating conservatives is easy. so easy, even a caveman can do it!
"if this were a dictatorship, it would be a heck lot easier, just so long as im the dictator" -GWB Dec 18,2002
Posts: 1614 | Location: ft myers florida area | Registered: 23 September 2006
GG, there is no such thing as hell. it was a scare tactic devised by the romain catholic church to keep control over the masses. think about it:
I will do the research to give you what the Catholic Church teaches about hell but I don't really believe you are interested because it appears that you walk the W I D E road and have been seduced by modernists' relativistic, no absolutes UNREASONED faith of secularism.
* * * * * * * * Without traditional regular moral principles that may be consulted confidently, justice cannot long endure anywhere.
Posts: 6275 | Location: Maine | Registered: 31 December 2005
So if heaven and hell exist, exactly what happens to people who are directly responsible for the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people?? Or do a couple of 'hail marys' and a trip to the confession box cancel out all of it!
At least I do feel comfortable in the knowledge that the people who use religion to justify their actions are not very smart, just very intolerant.
Posts: 176 | Location: Seattle/UK | Registered: 17 March 2007
So if heaven and hell exist, exactly what happens to people who are directly responsible for the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people??
Do you mean the abortionists, Planned baronhood, voters who vote in the party who needs abortion and EMBRYONIC stem cell research, amoral believers? Who are you talking about?
Actually, the short answer to your question is that God gave us a code of conduct for our ultimate good. Those who think they have a better one - well only God knows the heart and He decides on that fateful day of judgment. None of us know who have obtained life everlasting for that is not revealed to us.
* * * * * * * * Without traditional regular moral principles that may be consulted confidently, justice cannot long endure anywhere.
Posts: 6275 | Location: Maine | Registered: 31 December 2005
This Feminine radicalism presumes to increase happiness and vitality to society. Women suffer the most when they do not understand the nobility of their destiny is rooted in the dignity of their personhood, in the privilege of being a woman.
".. Motherhood and virginity (the two loftiest values in which she realizes her profoundest vocation) have become values that are in opposition to the dominant ones. Woman, who is creative in the truest sense of the word by giving life, does not “produce,” however, in that technical sense which is the only one that is valued by a society more masculine than ever in its cult of efficiency.
She is being convinced that the aim is to “liberate” her, “emancipate” her, by encouraging her to masculinize herself, thus bringing her into conformity with the culture of production and subjecting her to the control of the masculine society of technicians, of salesman, of politicians who seek profit and power, organizing everything, marketing everything, instrumentalizing everything for their own ends.
While asserting that sexual differentiation is in reality secondary (and accordingly, denying the body itself as an incarnation of the spirit in a sexual being), woman is robbed not only of motherhood but also of the free choice of virginity. Yet, just as man cannot procreate without her, likewise he cannot be virgin save by “imitating” woman who, also in this way, has a surpassing value as “sign,” as “example” for the other part of humanity.
The Ratzinger Report, 1985, pp. 197, is published by Ignatius Press, San Francisco. It has recently been reprinted. I
* * * * * * * * Without traditional regular moral principles that may be consulted confidently, justice cannot long endure anywhere.
Posts: 6275 | Location: Maine | Registered: 31 December 2005
FATHERS VS. TITI MONKEYS … HAS FEMINISM GONE TOO FAR? GrassTopsUSA Commentary By Sydney Whitmyer 06-22-07 Attention all Fathers!
Apparently, you are not as good as the male titi monkey!
How disrespectful and down-right dirty for TIME Magazine -- as Father's Day approached -- to come out with an article entitled: Dad’s Don’t Deserve a Day.
The article, written by a woman, questioned whether or not Dads have done a “good enough job to deserve the honor” because they are screwing-up so bad.
It’s so bad that apparently, anthropologists think that monkeys do better when it comes to parenting—yes monkeys, but more specifically the titi monkey!
Why? Now don’t laugh: it’s because some investigators at the California Primate Center have recently discovered that “baby titi monkeys are in the arms of their fathers for as much as 90% of daylight hours.”
They seem to be completely mystified as to why that’s the case, since homosapien fathers don’t spend even half that time with their children. So, anthropologists are trying to figure out why paternal care in our species is so different from that of the titi monkey.
What a laugh! How entertaining!
No offense, but it doesn’t take an anthropologist to figure out the answer to that question. Titi monkeys don’t have a soul like humans, which means that God simply made them that way. They have absolutely no idea what they are doing.
However, what makes this story even more entertaining is the practical reason why the titis hold their babies 90% of time: because otherwise they would fall out of the tree! Leave it to TIME Magazine to present the image of a loving titi monkey daddy holding the baby merely for bonding purposes!
I’m confused! The libs, including TIME Magazine, are always exonerating diversity, so why all of a sudden do they now become so intolerant of the diverse styles of fathering between human fathers and titi fathers?! It appears that TIME just can’t dig deep within its precious, liberal heart to “celebrate diversity”. Rather judgmental of them, don’t you think?
What about the other side of the coin? What is mother titi monkey doing while daddy titi is holding the titi tot? Probably going out and gathering food for the little titi family. All father titi monkey has to do is sit around and hold the baby. The father titi gets all of this credit for sitting and lounging around all day. Does he have to change diapers? If little titi won’t behave does he have to reprimand him? Does he have to serenade the child to sleep? Come on TIME! They are animals for cyin’ out loud, not humans!
The "chichification" of America brought to you by the "feminazis" has gone entirely way too far, folks!
Unlike the lazy titi father, most fathers I know are hardworking and are constantly making an effort to spend time with their children—with what little time they have, that is.
And why do they have very little time? Because most fathers, more often then not, are working and trying to provide for the family, which just might explain why they don’t hold their children 90% of the time. If they did, then who would work to pay the bills and put food on the table? The mother of the family of course; however, I have a feeling that fathers would lose either way, because then they would be accused of not working hard enough and lounging around with children 90% of the time. See the double standard here?
I have no doubt that there are situations where the father doesn’t hold up his end, however the same can be said of mothers, which the article fails to mention. After all, mothers are the primary caregivers, yet countless stories have been told of mothers abandoning their newborns or aborting them.
Would anyone dare say that mothers, by a long shot, are screwing-up more? The blame need not be put entirely on the father, but on both; and society as well, for messing around with the idea of parental roles.
Rise-up all you fathers out there and prepare to battle the male-wannabe’s of the world, otherwise, welcome to the soon-to-be world of “Who needs a father anyway?”! If Hillary has her way, maybe the village will raise your child!
Thank you, feminists! Thank you for taking us down this path!
* * * * * * * * Without traditional regular moral principles that may be consulted confidently, justice cannot long endure anywhere.
Posts: 6275 | Location: Maine | Registered: 31 December 2005
Someday I’d like to take a poll and ask people, “What does it mean to be a woman? What does it mean to be a man?”
It seems that men and women have lost their identity! We are told that men and women are equal, which today seems to mean that they are the same, not that they are equal in dignity. What has happened to this distinction?
At the beginning of the feminist movement, feminists promised that women would cease to be slaves of men and would truly be able to be women. However, instead of fulfilling this promise, feminism has led to a blurring of what it means to be a woman, has stolen the heart of our culture, and has caused unbelievable damage in society!
We have lost sight of the fact that men and women are different, in beautiful complimentary ways. Something must be wrong in our society when a woman is afraid to tell others that she wants to stay at home with her children. Today, this decision causes dissension and even condemnation, because apparently a woman should want a high powered job, in which she can thrive upon competition and enjoy rubbing her power in the faces of men. At the same time, any man whose wife chooses to stay at home faces the accusation of being a chauvinistic pig.
We must face facts, men and women were created differently. They are both intelligent and talented, but their intelligence and talents lie in different directions. In general, men are much better at seeing the trees in the forest, while a woman has a broader view and sees the forest with all the trees. Together, using their particular gifts men and women can accomplish much.
Feminism has stolen the identity of both men and women! According to our politically correct regime, we can no longer differentiate between a woman and a man. Women are told that they must be as aggressive as men; men are taught that they should be as sensitive as women. What is the result? Some men have become more like women, and some women have become more like men: the gay movement! It is tragic, but in many ways, it results from our lost vision of what manhood and womanhood really mean!
We must travel back in time; we must allow men to be men and women to be women! Let's cease having a blurred identity, let's show the world that together men who are men and women who are women can change the world!
* * * * * * * * Without traditional regular moral principles that may be consulted confidently, justice cannot long endure anywhere.
Posts: 6275 | Location: Maine | Registered: 31 December 2005
Individuals are legally responsible for their views. Messages or parts of messages may be quoted or read on the radio, or reprinted in Thom's books and other materials.
Discussion Community 
is a profitable business.
