I've noticed an anti-Catholic prejudice in many Christian materials - wondering...

[Nicole M]

True, but without clear definitions laid out at the start of the discussion, it does quickly reach a frustrating impasse, even if persuasion is not the purpose.

 

We often, as several folks noted, end up talking past one another because we all think we're speaking the same language, but we're not. We don't use the same words with the same meanings or connotations.

 

Clear definitions. This is why I asked the homosexuality question, to get a sense of what the pov was there. And here, too.

 

I think we can be exposed to an alternative pov, but not really have any idea of the terms of the discussion.

 

I feel really privileged to have witnessed the evolution of this thread.

[*anj*]

Well, if there's chocolate involved, then you better come on over to my place for this discussion. Seattle area.

 

Ooooh, that's tempting. I keep hearing about all of these wonderful independently owned coffee roasters out there.... ;)

[Nicole M]

Fine with me. The weather in Texas is too hot for sitting outside with cigars and chocolate. Now in a few months...

 

But the Pacific NW is alright by me. :D

 

Hold the phone there, mister! I didn't realize that you're from Texas. Now I have to go re-read all your posts with an accent!

[clwcain]

I feel really privileged to have witnessed the evolution of this thread.

 

Thanks for starting the thread. This wouldn't have happened had it not been for your initial post.

[Nicole M]

Ooooh, that's tempting. I keep hearing about all of these wonderful independently owned coffee roasters out there.... ;)

 

And we have small independently owned microbreweries, too. :tongue_smilie:

 

In fact, you could say our house actually is one. We've got some home brew a-brewing right now. Though I personally stick with the chocolate.

[clwcain]

Hold the phone there, mister! I didn't realize that you're from Texas. Now I have to go re-read all your posts with an accent!

 

:willy_nilly:

 

Oh, please don't. I'm a Texas transplant. I'm from New Orleans, originally. But as a trained actor I've learned both Received Pronunciation and Standard American English. Add in the foreign languages I'm familiar with, and you get a mish-mash.

 

When I get tired, or around my family, I sound like I'm from S. Jersey, since that is the New Orleans accent.

 

But get me around my English friends, and I sound English; my Irish friends, and I sound Irish. I've even been accused of knowing Italian by a Roman, because he thought I spoke like a native, my lack of vocabulary and poor grammar notwithstanding.

 

I'm not sure how I sound to others, but I definitely don't have a Texas twang, and I'm fighting it in my children as they learn to speak. :001_huh:

 

:lol:

[Laura K (NC)]

Here's an example of a jab at the Catholic Church that has nothing to do with the subject matter. The 3rd and 4th words in the textbook are "Protestant Reformation:"

 

After the Protestant Reformation in Europe, a number of people dedicated their lives to studying and writing aboutnature. Most of these early modern scientists -- great men like Sir Isaac Newton, Galileo Galilei, Sir Francis Bacon, and Robert Boyle -- believed in God, and many wrote of God's infinite wisdom and design in creation. They believed that we live in an orderly universe that operates according to a well-designed plan. With this foundation firmly in mind, they established the purpose of science: to carefully observe nature and to try to discover the laws of creation so these laws can be put to work for the benefit of mankind. The diligence of the early post-Reformation scientists in organizing and categorizing the parts of God's wonderful creation, in asking questions about the things they observed, and in finding ways to test their observations and ideas, made them the founders of science as we know today.

 

The problem here is trying to inject religion into a science text for really no reason. The Protestant Reformers didn't reform Science, as this text implies. The same forces at work in Europe caused both the Reformation and the explosion of scientific study. Galileo was a devout Catholic and never left the Church. His trouble with the Church was not theological, but scientific. Copernicus is conspicuously absent from the list of systematic scientists, but maybe that's because his views were not only at odds with the Catholic Church but with the Protestant reformers as well. :leaving:

 

Prominent Catholic scientists who had no altercation with the Catholic Church were ignored from the short list of scientists from this date range. Tycho Brahe, Gregor Mendel were both ignored, as were the Jesuits. We won't even speak of the atheist and deist scientists of the Enlightenment -- the same time period. The atheists and deists can defend them. :)

 

In mentioning select scientists from 3 centuries as representative of the glorious result of the Reformation is just an error. The ones chosen for the short list were absolutely chosen because of their conflict with either the Jesuits or the papacy. I can provide links to support this if I need to.

 

How much better this very first page of this text would have been to merely say that scientists gradually grew in understanding of the order of God's creation, and then listed how they did this. I didn't have to buy an A Beka science book, and they didn't have to make it Catholic friendly, but at this point on the front page, they're distorting history for a polemic intent. The scientists mentioned were not great because of their religious affiliation or because of the influence of the Protestant Reformation. To be fair, Catholic texts do a similar thing, and I try to be just as discerning when I present them to my kids. Promoting one's religion to one's children is crucial! But it shouldn't be done at the expense of truth.

[*anj*]

And we have small independently owned microbreweries, too. :tongue_smilie:

 

In fact, you could say our house actually is one. We've got some home brew a-brewing right now. Though I personally stick with the chocolate.

 

Mmmm...and fresh salmon to boot. I'm on my way!

[Nicole M]

:willy_nilly:

 

Oh, please don't. I'm a Texas transplant. I'm from New Orleans, originally. But as a trained actor I've learned both Received Pronunciation and Standard American English. Add in the foreign languages I'm familiar with, and you get a mish-mash.

 

When I get tired, or around my family, I sound like I'm from S. Jersey, since that is the New Orleans accent.

 

But get me around my English friends, and I sound English; my Irish friends, and I sound Irish. I've even been accused of knowing Italian by a Roman, because he thought I spoke like a native, my lack of vocabulary and poor grammar notwithstanding.

 

I'm not sure how I sound to others, but I definitely don't have a Texas twang, and I'm fighting it in my children as they learn to speak. :001_huh:

 

:lol:

 

Oh, my! Well, that's good news, since I won't have to re-arrange how I "hear" you. New Orleans is the one accent I can't do. It's kind of a combo between southern and South Jersey, though. At least with my in-laws it is.

 

Now, let me ask you this. My dear mother in law, who has lived all her 80-plus years in New Orleans, told me after the death of my grandmother that now I could "pray to her", my grandmother. MIL was offering comfort in the best way she knew how. Having read the discussion above, I get this a little more, but I tell you I nearly fell off my chair when I heard that. I never did pray to her, because I imagined that poor woman, a good Presyterian all her life, getting a message from one of her Catholic friends, "Audra, there's a call for you on line one." I always imagined that she would have cast embarrassed glances around at her friends and then picked up the line with her customary "A-HYELL-O!?" So do you count your own relatives as saints, in the colloquial way, that can be prayed to?

 

I ask because I have always been suspicious that the parish where my husband grew up has it's own, uh, flavor of Catholicism that is very much culturally influenced.

 

Sorry. I knew you thought we were done with this. And heck, I could have missed a page, and this might already have been addressed. You can PM me a heads-up in that case.

 

Nicole

[Peek a Boo]

Ah.....but that is difference in POV exactly!! We don't believe they are dead! They are saints. The word saint has a very definite meaning......someone who is in heaven. They are living in the presence of God. If heaven is truly the joy of constant presence and worship of God, who better to ask pray for you than the very ones in His presence.

 

[just a note to say i read all the other responses too, but won't try to quote them all, lol]

 

I do agree that they are living in the presence of God. But I also see a distinction between those living w/ God [like Lazarus] and the response about Lazarus dealing w/ those on earth.

 

but i have to confess that i'm not following how mark 12: 20-27 applies: it certainly likens the previously dead now to angels, but i don't recall many Protestants praying to angels either --not even guardian angels ;)

 

I'll read the Catholic links in a bit to save ya'll having to explain even more, lol. i do understand that while i might not agree w/ a doctrine, the people espousing them tend to have a pretty good reason for ascribing to them.....

 

but I'll take some of that Belgian chocolate!

:D

[clwcain]

So do you count your own relatives as saints, in the colloquial way, that can be prayed to?

 

Prayed to for intercession? No, with the exception of my son.

 

Prayed for in hopes that they'll experience the Beatific Vision, certainly. But that gets into Purgatory and other topics I'm not sure we really want to dive into until we're face to face over chocolate. :D

 

The details of the answer have to do with certainty and the obligation to pray for the dead (one of the Works of Mercy).

 

Only with baptized infants and canonized Saints do I have the assurance of the Church that the person I'm praying to for intercession enjoys the Beatific Vision.

 

For much of the last 40-odd years this has been a very muddled idea, especially in Catholic circles. But the teaching is clear. When there is doubt as to the state of the soul, prayers for that person are called for. When there is certainty then one may pray to them for intercession freely and joyfully.

 

HTH

[Michelle in MO]

Not only do those in heaven pray with us, they also pray for us. In the book of Revelation, we read: "[An] angel came and stood at the altar [in heaven] with a golden censer; and he was given much incense to mingle with the prayers of all the saints upon the golden altar before the throne; and the smoke of the incense rose with the prayers of the saints from the hand of the angel before God" (Rev. 8:3-4).

 

And those in heaven who offer to God our prayers aren’t just angels, but humans as well. John sees that "the twenty-four elders [the leaders of the people of God in heaven] fell down before the Lamb, each holding a harp, and with golden bowls full of incense, which are the prayers of the saints" (Rev. 5:8). The simple fact is, as this passage shows: The saints in heaven offer to God the prayers of the saints on earth.

 

I've read. I'm not sure if I could formalize this into a doctrine, per se, but I have to say that I can really understand better your POV from these Scriptures.

 

Without sounding "spooky" about this, in moments of grief in my own life, I would have to honestly say that I've wondered if those who have passed on to heaven before me are "with" me in a way that I can't understand. I wondered this about ten years ago when one of my best friends passed away.

 

Clwcain and others---you are explaining your beliefs in a very understandable way. May I join you and *anj* and some of the others for a place at the table with that chocolate? :)

 

This has been a very rep. worthy discussion! (Rats---I have to wait---too much dished out in the last 24 hours!)

[clwcain]

Clwcain and others---you are explaining your beliefs in a very understandable way. May I join you and *anj* and some of the others for a place at the table with that chocolate? :)

 

I have no objection, but we'll have to defer to Nicole M's table size. She'll be hosting the chocolate-drenched pow-wow. :D

 

This has been a very rep. worthy discussion! (Rats---I have to wait---too much dished out in the last 24 hours!)

 

I agree. And I, too, am out of Rep for a while.

 

Oh and I provide the following link to the blog of an acquaintance of mine who had a post about the question of Tradition and its role in the Church from the Catholic vs. a "Reformed" POV:

http://cantuar.blogspot.com/2008/08/reformed-infallibility-vs-catholic.html

Taylor's post isn't an official explanation. Turn to the previously linked Catechism for that. But it might help clear up some of the conceptual framework that divides our understanding. HTH

 

FWIW

[fractalgal]

I've read. I'm not sure if I could formalize this into a doctrine, per se, but I have to say that I can really understand better your POV from these Scriptures.

 

This has been a very rep. worthy discussion!

 

If you are interested, you could read this

http://www.newmanreader.org/works/development/

which is an essay written by Venerable John Henry Newman.

[Nicole M]

I have no objection, but we'll have to defer to Nicole M's table size. She'll be hosting the chocolate-drenched pow-wow. :D

 

 

 

Wasn't there a thread recently about your "soapbox"? Mine is welcome. All about welcoming. There's always room. My house is little, though, so it will be cozy.

 

And, I want Bill to know, and Drew, and Jenny in Atl, and Mom of 7, and Carol in CA, and who am I forgetting? Lots, I'm sure. They're all invited, too.

 

But Chris, I promise, I won't play any John Lennon. :D

 

[ETA: Chris, I almost stepped into a liquor store today when I was out shopping, to pick up some - what was it you said, Scotch? And then I thought, wouldn't that be choice? My husband would be very suspicious. He knows the first sip would render me incapable of uttering multisyllabic words. The second would put me right under the table. So coming home with that bottle, I'd definitely have some 'spainin' to do. "Honey, I bought it for this guy from Texas on the Well Trained Mind board...." Right. That would go over well. So I'll wait until we set the date to start stocking up. Chocolate, check. Already set.]

[clwcain]

But Chris, I promise, I won't play any John Lennon. :D

You have my deepest thanks. :D

 

"Honey, I bought it for this guy from Texas on the Well Trained Mind board...." Right. That would go over well. So I'll wait until we set the date to start stocking up. Chocolate, check. Already set.

 

:rofl:

 

Sounds like a plan. Once we set a date for WTM pow-wow, we can put together shopping lists. I'll see what I can do about getting some goat milk chocolate from Europe for the occasion.

 

:party:

[Annie N]

Wow, 27 pages!!!!!! My jaw is down to the floor!!!!!

 

I didn't read all the posts.... but just wanted to say I am looking forward to it :) Altho I suspect it will take a few days!!!!!

 

I think it must have been the generous application of chocolate which kept everything peaceable!

[Spy Car]

i think most Protestants would maintain that the biggest difference is that we don't ask dead people to pray for us ;)

 

 

I guess the question is whether people at God's right hand are dead, no?

 

Bill

[Alenee]

I guess the question is whether people at God's right hand are dead, no?

 

Bill

 

No, I wouldn't think that between the two there's any dispute as to the fact that their spirit is alive and with Christ though I guess it would depend on the differing opinions on "asleep". There are some groups who believe that when your body dies, you're immediately with the Lord and other groups who think your soul is asleep until the second coming.

 

I think it's just beyond the Protestant's belief to actually ask one of them to intercede for us. What has me confused are the verses that are being used to support of the intercession of the passed-on saints. I plan on a deep word study on angels and saints. It just doesn't add up to me.

[laylamcb]

I have no objection, but we'll have to defer to Nicole M's table size. She'll be hosting the chocolate-drenched pow-wow. :D

 

 

 

 

Whoa, whoa, whoa now--what's this?? Hold on there, pardners! I step away from the internet to attend to my family for a couple of hours, and what do I find?! A chocolate party all set up, invitations issued, yours truly left out in the cold. SO wrong. ;)

 

"Oh, you'll stray now and again, but you'll always come back to your dark master: the cocoa bean." Kramer, Seinfeld

[clwcain]

Whoa, whoa, whoa now--what's this?? Hold on there, pardners! I step away from the internet to attend to my family for a couple of hours, and what do I find?! A chocolate party all set up, invitations issued, yours truly left out in the cold. SO wrong. ;)

 

"Oh, you'll stray now and again, but you'll always come back to your dark master: the cocoa bean." Kramer, Seinfeld

 

Nah. Only proposed, with no invites issued yet. That's why she couldn't buy the Scotch for me. :D :lol:

[Faithr]

Hi Carli,

 

I found a neat link that lists lots of scriptural passages to support praying to the saints (a -hem, I mean asking intercession!) I haven't checked it out but it looks like it would be interesting to work through. Here it is: http://www.scripturecatholic.com/saints.html

[Alenee]

Hi Carli,

 

I found a neat link that lists lots of scriptural passages to support praying to the saints (a -hem, I mean asking intercession!) I haven't checked it out but it looks like it would be interesting to work through. Here it is: http://www.scripturecatholic.com/saints.html

 

Thanks! :)

[*anj*]

It has come to my attention that I am coming across in a hateful way. It seems that everything I've said in this thread has been snarky and that it looks like I hate Catholics.

 

Apparently I have hurt someone here, please accept my humble apologies. I thought I had made my feelings clear, as did many other people in this thread. I thought it was understood that we were all free to share our opinions, despite differences of opinion.

 

Again, please accept my apology.

[HRAAB]

It has come to my attention that I am coming across in a hateful way. It seems that everything I've said in this thread has been snarky and that it looks like I hate Catholics.

 

Apparently I have hurt someone here, please accept my humble apologies. I thought I had made my feelings clear, as did many other people in this thread. I thought it was understood that we were all free to share our opinions, despite differences of opinion.

 

Again, please accept my apology.

 

I never interpreted any of your posts as snarky or hateful. As you mentioned, that is the risk with discussing this topic within the medium. Eye contact, voice inflection adds so much to a conversation. I thought you were trying to be clear and precise.

 

And I've gained much from this discussion, also. Thank you.

 

Janet

[clwcain]

I never interpreted any of your posts as snarky or hateful. As you mentioned, that is the risk with discussing this topic within the medium. Eye contact, voice inflection adds so much to a conversation. I thought you were trying to be clear and precise.

 

And I've gained much from this discussion, also. Thank you.

 

Janet

 

:iagree:

[Pam "SFSOM" in TN]

...that it looks like I hate Catholics.

 

Wait, what? You mean Catholic like that guy on your blog who, oh, fathered all your children and who thinks you're pretty cute? That kind of Catholic?

 

Amazing.

 

Who knew. You've hidden your feelings so well up til now. :001_huh:

[Nicole M]

You mean Catholic like that guy on your blog who, oh, fathered all your children and who thinks you're pretty cute? That kind of Catholic?

 

Amazing.

 

Who knew. You've hidden your feelings so well up til now. :001_huh:

 

Um. I'm afraid there can be no chocolate / Scotch / Mike's party unless you can come.

 

I'm sure all the rest of us agree about that, even if we can't agree about, oh, salvation and sin and stuff.

[Pam "SFSOM" in TN]

Um. I'm afraid there can be no chocolate / Scotch / Mike's party unless you can come.

 

I'm sure all the rest of us agree about that, even if we can't agree about, oh, salvation and sin and stuff.

 

 

:auto:

 

I have two weeks. Have your people PM my people.

[clwcain]

:auto:

 

I have two weeks. Have your people PM my people.

 

:rofl::rofl::rofl:

[Nicole M]

:auto:

 

I have two weeks. Have your people PM my people.

 

It's official! A party! Quick, I have to clean the house! :willy_nilly:

 

 

Pamela, Chris and Anj, oh my! Pamela, Chris and Anj, oh my!

 

Leila, too!

 

:party:

[clwcain]

It's official! A party! Quick, I have to clean the house! :willy_nilly:

 

 

Pamela, Chris and Anj, oh my! Pamela, Chris and Anj, oh my!

 

:party:

 

Along with everyone else who's participated and...[wait for it]...our entourages!

:eek:

[C_l_e_0..Q_c]

Hey I'm in too!

I've been sidetracked from this thread due to not one but two sick kids, and my supporting network being all gone at the same time.. Not good.

 

But I did find my Apologia General Science book hiding under a pile of laundry (what was it doing there anyway??)

[Carol in Cal.]

 

And, I want Bill to know, and Drew, and Jenny in Atl, and Mom of 7, and Carol in CA, and who am I forgetting? Lots, I'm sure. They're all invited, too.

 

[ So I'll wait until we set the date to start stocking up. Chocolate, check. Already set.]

 

I am So THERE!

[Carol in Cal.]

Here's an example of a jab at the Catholic Church that has nothing to do with the subject matter. The 3rd and 4th words in the textbook are "Protestant Reformation:"

 

 

 

The problem here is trying to inject religion into a science text for really no reason. The Protestant Reformers didn't reform Science, as this text implies. The same forces at work in Europe caused both the Reformation and the explosion of scientific study. Galileo was a devout Catholic and never left the Church. His trouble with the Church was not theological, but scientific. Copernicus is conspicuously absent from the list of systematic scientists, but maybe that's because his views were not only at odds with the Catholic Church but with the Protestant reformers as well. :leaving:

 

Prominent Catholic scientists who had no altercation with the Catholic Church were ignored from the short list of scientists from this date range. Tycho Brahe, Gregor Mendel were both ignored, as were the Jesuits. We won't even speak of the atheist and deist scientists of the Enlightenment -- the same time period. The atheists and deists can defend them. :)

 

In mentioning select scientists from 3 centuries as representative of the glorious result of the Reformation is just an error. The ones chosen for the short list were absolutely chosen because of their conflict with either the Jesuits or the papacy. I can provide links to support this if I need to.

 

How much better this very first page of this text would have been to merely say that scientists gradually grew in understanding of the order of God's creation, and then listed how they did this. I didn't have to buy an A Beka science book, and they didn't have to make it Catholic friendly, but at this point on the front page, they're distorting history for a polemic intent. The scientists mentioned were not great because of their religious affiliation or because of the influence of the Protestant Reformation. To be fair, Catholic texts do a similar thing, and I try to be just as discerning when I present them to my kids. Promoting one's religion to one's children is crucial! But it shouldn't be done at the expense of truth.

 

I don't think that this text implies that the Reformation reformed science. I have never heard anyone assert anything of the sort, during my whole Lutheran 50 years. In fact, some of the scientists that are mentioned in that quote are Catholic after the Reformation. I think that the point of the quote is that the scientists were motivated by their belief in God--something that is quite novel to a lot of students today, who are often of the impression that science and faith are mutually incompatible.

[*anj*]

I never interpreted any of your posts as snarky or hateful. As you mentioned, that is the risk with discussing this topic within the medium. Eye contact, voice inflection adds so much to a conversation. I thought you were trying to be clear and precise.

 

And I've gained much from this discussion, also. Thank you.

 

Janet

 

Thank you. I appreciate that the feeling is mutual.

 

:iagree:

Thanks, Chris!! :001_smile:

 

Wait, what? You mean Catholic like that guy on your blog who, oh, fathered all your children and who thinks you're pretty cute? That kind of Catholic?

 

Amazing.

 

Who knew. You've hidden your feelings so well up til now. :001_huh:

 

You crack me up! Yup, apparently that kind of Catholic. Not to mention all of our relatives who are Catholic too. :001_huh:

 

Boo! ;)

[*anj*]

It's official! A party! Quick, I have to clean the house! :willy_nilly:

 

 

Pamela, Chris and Anj, oh my! Pamela, Chris and Anj, oh my!

 

Leila, too!

 

:party:

 

Woohoo!!! I could use a good party! I'm on my way!!! :hurray::cheers2::biggrinjester:

[Michelle in MO]

It has come to my attention that I am coming across in a hateful way. It seems that everything I've said in this thread has been snarky and that it looks like I hate Catholics.

 

Maybe I missed something, but I read your posts as being full of careful thought and a heart full of love.

 

Please, don't anyone leave me out of the party planning! This has been one of the most intelligent, lively, and informative discussions I've seen on these boards.

 

Nicole, sometime I'll have to PM you to ask you about Jesuit schools, if you don't mind. :) I'm very interested in one in St. Louis.

 

:party: :cheers2: :thumbup:

[OnTheBrink]

Two things:

 

1) Can I come to the party?

 

2) I thought Ang's posts were fine. I never got the sense of Catholic hating in it.

[Peek a Boo]

No, I wouldn't think that between the two there's any dispute as to the fact that their spirit is alive and with Christ though I guess it would depend on the differing opinions on "asleep". There are some groups who believe that when your body dies, you're immediately with the Lord and other groups who think your soul is asleep until the second coming.

 

I think it's just beyond the Protestant's belief to actually ask one of them to intercede for us. What has me confused are the verses that are being used to support of the intercession of the passed-on saints. I plan on a deep word study on angels and saints. It just doesn't add up to me.

 

 

yeah, this is where I am too.

and something i try to keep in mind about Revelation is that there are various interpretations for its time and purpose, so i am leery of applying much of it to the here and now. But i do agree it is vital to our understanding of stuff.

 

and anj-- you're fine!

 

i wanna come, but i'll bring my own coke. please don't let the weather be c-c-c-colld! I'm loving this Texas heat! ;D

[OnTheBrink]

Well both parties can now feel united as those-whom-Phred-loathes. True ecumenicalism does exist.

 

:smilielol5:

[Laura K (NC)]

Only one of those scientists in the quote was Catholic -- Galileo. And he was silenced by the Church.

 

In chapter 10, the textbook says that it was because of the Reformation reliance on the Bible that Christian scientists finally saw the light. Before the Reformation -- superstition. After the Reformation -- Bible truth even on science matters. On the same page there are also some digs at scholasticism (Thomas Aquinas et al) who relied on Aristotle to marry faith to reason. It was scholasticism, ironically, that paved the way for these scientists to do the same.

 

I quote the texts concerning the Catholic Church:

 

Because people did not have the Bible to guide them in their beliefs, superstition took the place of science.

By accepting the ideas of Aristotle, people during the Middle Ages worshiped nature; and because they did not understand nature, they feared it. Their superstitious worship and fear of nature kept them from studying nature and learning how to make nature work for them. (p. 354)

 

Why did modern science begin so suddenly in the 1500's? The main reason for the increased development of science was the return to the Bible sparked by the Protestant Reformation which began in 1517. The return to the authority of the Scriptures, which was the hallmark of the Protestant movement, gave people an interest in learning about the natural world which the God of the Scriptures had created.

 

To their credit, they didn't actually come out and say that the Reformation was a Reformation against Catholicism. I don't think they really needed to say that, though, because of course the Reformers were trying to reform... the Church. The superstitious Church that didn't know or care to know the Bible. There is a lot of bold type on that page to drive the point home.

 

This is just so inaccurate. I'm not going to go on and say how the situation concerning nature was exactly the opposite. I'm just going to keep that to myself. Unless someone asks, of course.

[Gretchen in NJ]

It has come to my attention that I am coming across in a hateful way. It seems that everything I've said in this thread has been snarky and that it looks like I hate Catholics.

 

Apparently I have hurt someone here, please accept my humble apologies. I thought I had made my feelings clear, as did many other people in this thread. I thought it was understood that we were all free to share our opinions, despite differences of opinion.

 

Again, please accept my apology.

I thought you were thinking of others when you posted. Thank you for your contribution to this thread. I have found it very enlighting to read.:D

 

 

Could you get me an envite to this chocolate, coffee, scotch party? I could use a :auto: too.

[8filltheheart]

I don't know Nicole......is this going to be a free flowing of ideas in pleasant exchange in order to understand each other better or where one person is right and the rest are simply deluded?? Or is that where the Scotch comes in.......we simply won't care!!! :tongue_smilie:

[Gretchen in NJ]

The same could be said for you in your numerous attempts to make us all see how wrong we are. Imagine what could be done instead.:)

:D

[laylamcb]

It has come to my attention that I am coming across in a hateful way. It seems that everything I've said in this thread has been snarky and that it looks like I hate Catholics.

 

Apparently I have hurt someone here, please accept my humble apologies. I thought I had made my feelings clear, as did many other people in this thread. I thought it was understood that we were all free to share our opinions, despite differences of opinion.

 

Again, please accept my apology.

 

I'm not Catholic, but I didn't think you sounded snarky at all. Keep your insightful posts coming, *anj*. :001_smile:

[8filltheheart]

It is also a very strange position for a textbook condemning all viewpoints other than young earth creationism. Considering why the Church took the stance it did, young earth creationists are in the EXACT same scenerio as the Church....squelching view points that they think contradict scripture!!

 

Sorry.....I am always struck by irony. I think I have over-used that word in this thread!! But it is true. But I have been ostracized so much for being Catholic, I am simply glad that I have learned to laugh about it!! :)

[Nicole M]

I don't know Nicole......is this going to be a free flowing of ideas in pleasant exchange in order to understand each other better or where one person is right and the rest are simply deluded?? Or is that where the Scotch comes in.......we simply won't care!!! :tongue_smilie:

 

Well.... First off, I've been meaning to ask: Do I get some kind of prize for starting a thread with the most male involvement ever (in my memory) on these boards? Cuz this has been somthin' else indeed.

 

To answer your question, I imagine free flowing ideas. I already mentioned that the Scotch will have me under the table, but I trust that, yes, that will help keep things amicable. And, if all else fails, I see Bill as a sort of referee ("I love you, man! :D") if things get out of hand, and, you know, we have to separate anyone. If it gets really out of control, I trust that Chris will pray for the, what was it called? salvation of our souls. That.

 

Bases covered?

[Faithr]

Oh, I want to come to the party too, but I have a terrible problem! I'm allergic to chocolate! It's gives me killer migraines.

 

Can I come too even though I'm such a party pooper? I wouldn't mind a little scotch. . . . I only get headaches from that if I drink too much!

[laylamcb]

Oh, I want to come to the party too, but I have a terrible problem! I'm allergic to chocolate! It's gives me killer migraines.

 

Can I come too even though I'm such a party pooper? I wouldn't mind a little scotch. . . . I only get headaches from that if I drink too much!

 

Holy mackerel! Allergic to chocolate! {{shudder}} Bless you, dear. :001_smile: