/christ/ - Christian Discussion and Fellowship

>accept them

Kek,

have you heard zizeks talk on the issue?

>inb4 zizek

its pretty interesting, it basically says that people say "yes" not because they want to help them, but because they want to avoid the "bad ad" for themselves. so they do it for selfish reasons just by pure peer presure

>>4503

>But is this true? Is it mandatory to take anyone?

I'd say… no

>If we shouldn't, how do you justify that? What's the alternative in the current situation?

If you don't even have enough to take care of your countrymen adequately, how are you going to take care of these people? Also, if you could make the argument that allowing the in your midst would be negative in the long run (cultural degradation, economic rot, spread of Islam, etc) that'd also be fine. Your duty is first to your family: your wife and you kids. If you can justify it as dangerous to your family, then you ought not to do it.

The alternative would be to be really really rich and help them, or to create separate, walled off, controlled areas for them to reside in.

>In what cases we would need to open borders for refugees?

Lots of resources, the people don't seem poisonous, to start. Would help if they were christians or at least sihks or something.

>Would you personally allow a stranger in your house if he asked you:

If I felt moved by the Spirit to do so I would. If not I wouldn't endanger my family like that.

>>4510

>have you heard zizeks talk on the issue?

No.

>>4505

Liked it.

But not exactly what I meant. I was referring to the current situation, especially in Syria and Iraq, not the systemic problem.

Here the measueres are different. Those 5-10mio people are a "dealable" measure for Europe if it wants it to be.

>>4513

>If you don't even have enough to take care of your countrymen adequately, how are you going to take care of these people?

But we have. We have more than enough.

> Also, if you could make the argument that allowing the in your midst would be negative in the long run (cultural degradation, economic rot, spread of Islam, etc) that'd also be fine. Your duty is first to your family: your wife and you kids. If you can justify it as dangerous to your family, then you ought not to do it.

But is this the case? How dangerous are they?

>The alternative would be to be really really rich and help them, or to create separate, walled off, controlled areas for them to reside in.

Is done here. They are in prisons and old barracks atm, and in tents.

>Lots of resources, the people don't seem poisonous, to start. Would help if they were christians or at least sihks or something.

But does this make them really "worthy" of our help? Are we muslims now that ignore and persecute the unbelieving?

>If I felt moved by the Spirit to do so I would. If not I wouldn't endanger my family like that.

Feelings are not a good moral compass.

And what's about that? What should happen to them?

http://www.christianitytoday.com/gleanings/2015/april/muslim-migrants-throw-christians-overboard-mediterranean.html

>>4523

>Feelings are not a good moral compass.

but the Spirit is

>>4523

>But we have. We have more than enough.

Then that's your answer.

>But is this the case? How dangerous are they?

I'd say dangerous enough that I'd need some incentive to aid them honestly.

>Is done here. They are in prisons and old barracks atm, and in tents.

Good. Armed guards would help me sleep easier were I you.

>But does this make them really "worthy" of our help? Are we muslims now that ignore and persecute the unbelieving?

Its a start. If they are Christians at least you know you will agree on a fundamental level, even if there are great cultural or ethnic differences. If they are a different faith, especially Islam, this may not be the case. It is immoral to put others above the safety of your own family.

>Feelings are not a good moral compass.

Doctrinally speaking, Spiritual feelings are as reliable as the moral fortitude of the person having them. That is to say; assuming that I don't grow spiritually by the time I've a wife and children to preside over; I'd be forced to agree with you due to my own individual circumstance, and I'd have to use a different measuring stick to determine whether to aid or not.

>>4525

This is a strike against the "help them" case, I'd say. You could potentially make the case to only help the Christians out of pragmatism and practicality, since the muslims are so dangerous.

>>4530

But how would you recognise the Spirit?

Even if an angel appeared to you it could as well be a demon.

Or you going insane.

>>4532

>Then that's your answer.

So Europe has to take them?

>I'd say dangerous enough that I'd need some incentive to aid them honestly.

>Good. Armed guards would help me sleep easier were I you.

I'm a grown man and do not have to fear some halfling that looks more like a skeleton. We have about 50-60 asylum seekers here. They are weird, but no killer machines.

>This is a strike against the "help them" case, I'd say. You could potentially make the case to only help the Christians out of pragmatism and practicality, since the muslims are so dangerous.

But what needs to happen to these specific muslims?

>>4595

how do you know that Jesus is in your heart?

you just feel it i guess.

its like how jorodowsky said "how do you know if its schizophrenia or just miracles?"

that becomes a question of reality.

>>4616

>how do you know that Jesus is in your heart?

I'm baptised and take the Eucharist?

>you just feel it i guess.

This sounds like new age stuff. I prefer profound doctrine to feel good stuff.

>its like how jorodowsky said "how do you know if its schizophrenia or just miracles?"

>that becomes a question of reality.

But can't it be both? In a non-material world view, what would it matter if the things happening are material or not?

Do angels have a physical body? Does anything metaphysic need to have? Why would it matter?

When it comes to immigration, the problem is vaster than just what is one to do at that scale.

The problem is that we never mention what happens to the country where people immigrate from, and I don't mean the poor who are willing to risk their lives on boats to go to the Promised Land of Europe (and often find out it's not what they expected, that they'd like to go back home, but can't because they could only buy a one-way trip).

Some countries, even within the EU, are running out of doctors, with less than 1 doctor for 1500 people, because most doctors can make so much more money in another country of the EU, that it'd almost be foolish to stay, especially since people in poorer nations work for their families and send money back home a lot.

That's the real problem. When everyone's leaving a country, and you have richer nations encouraging this, and accusing anyone who is against that of xenophobia, fascism, etc, then the country from where people come can never develop. If everyone leaves, nobody wants to stay. When even those with very little prospect of a career in another country still take the risk to lose their lives for a chance, how will anyone else stay?

Even Greece faces that problem: young people leave. They'd rather work in another country where they are paid much more for the same job (where there is a job to take, too).

Accepting everyone, in the long run, doesn't cause any good. Take care of them when they're there, but solutions must be taken from above and it has to involve the countries of origin. You fix this problem by making people want to stay in their own countries; everyone deserves a nation where they can live happily, get an education, get a job, found a family.

We should all strive for that instead of stealing other nations' youth under the guise of being humanitarian.

>>4624

Off topic, I never understood why people keep mixing this up.

Immigration and asylum are two different things not related at all.

I'm 100% anti-immigration, reasoning:

>>4505

I do not see this colliding with Christianity at all. Refugees are a different topic though, I'm not sure on that.

>>4622

>I'm baptised and take the Eucharist?

>all who are baptised and take the eucharist are saved #thingsthatjesusneversaid

>>4623

that man is insane. everytime i think of dune and how it could be it blows my mind.

Pronlem is also the kind of refugees that exist. Pederasts can "flee" from Russia or Serbia here because they are "oppressed" and we take care of them. While there are really people in need of help. I cannot even describe how much this upsets me.

The Church here takes the right to give people asylum in our Church buildings and the police does not dare to storm them to take people from there. Is this ok?

>>4623

>I'm afraid your theology might not allow for another alternative if you claim you have more than enough to take care of them. I know *I* could find a way to turn them away with clean hands, but I don't know about from your perspective.

Tell.

>You cannot be everywhere all the time to protect the others, and there will be women and children around as well. Its better to be safe thn sorry.

hm.

> I guess either refuse to help or simply forgive the offence, at it would seem weird to "help" them and just throw them in jail.

Maybe there is no good solution then.

>Look, you know how barbarous these people are. Having them anywhere in your country will not turn out good

I do not think that everyone from the Levante is a savage.

> which would be unthinkable in our modern progressive "democracies".

Is quite common here tbh.

>>4627

>>all who are baptised and take the eucharist are saved #thingsthatjesusneversaid

Never said that.

>>4631

I do. And you should defend your faiths better than that because sacramental grace is a thing.

However, ""receiving"" the eucharist requires cooperation and freedom of ""mortal"" sin.

>>4627

>#thingsthatjesusneversaid

He did.

John 6:

53 Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you.

54 Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day.

55 For my flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed.

56 He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me, and I in him.

>>4628

>Tell.

Tell what?

>Maybe there is no good solution then.

Well, you have to choose a course of action, even if that action is ignoring the issue.

>I do not think that everyone from the Levante is a savage.

I thought these fellas were north africans, but even if not, I said "barbarous" not savage. They might not run around half naked scalping people and sacrificing children to the Moon, but they are certainly not on par with the average westerner, that's for dang sure.

>Is quite common here tbh.

If it in any way encourages them to retain their cultural norms, their ethnic and national identity, its not going far enough in my opinion. How effective are these, do you think, because Uncle /pol/ keeps showing me these stats and news stories about 'em.

>>4660

So the Catholics that will side with the antichrist are saved too?

>>4664

>How effective are these, do you think,

Depends on the region.

In the capital it's done in vain. Here however it works. Everyone knows each other here, if something was to happen we would know. They just have to behave.

>>4738

> Here however it works

Really? Has it worked enough that you think their children could be considered "Austrian"? Have they become productive members of society? Elaborate on this, I'm very curious.

>>4742

Why should they? They are refugees and are meant to return to their home country asap

>>4738

Sanctifying grace can be lost by committing a mortal sin. I don’t know from where you get the notion of OSAS.

> the Catholics that will side with the antichrist

Knowingly, it’s apostasy. Unknowingly, however, they are just believing in a system that was infiltrated.

>>4751

>Sanctifying grace can be lost by committing a mortal sin. I don’t know from where you get the notion of OSAS.

So what if I receive the communion in a state of mortal sin?

>. Unknowingly, however, they are just believing in a system that was infiltrated.

That's it? They will literally fight God and go to heaven?

>>4660

>He did.

and all christian denoms eats it you know? smh

>>4747

Ok that is true but you realize many people, especially the young people and the Liberals, don't see it this way, right? They want them to stay there so they can culturally enrich your country and your daughter.

>>4760

> They want them to stay there so they can culturally enrich your country and your daughter.

And I am fine with that. Only blacks can sexually satisfy my daughter and I'll tell her that.

Why should my daughter be dissatisfied?

>>4769

Don't let yourself be influenced by /pol/. They are like racist.

>>4625

>Off topic, I never understood why people keep mixing this up.

I don't know where you live, but much of the time, immigrants will immigrate regularly if they can, if not, they will ask for asylum, and if that doesn't work either, they'll just come, without a passport, pretend they don't remember where they come from, and by law you have to take care of them. I have family in the justice department of things here, and that's how it works. So perhaps asylum and immigration are very different things where you live, but in other places it's just a modality of the same thing: moving to another country.

When a country like Libya falls, you have tons of immigrants/asylum seekers, and you don't know who's a recently freed Libyan and who's a former torturer who really doesn't want to be around when the people strike back. There's an asylum not far from where I live, and they keep stabbing each other and molesting passers-by. They come from the same countries as the immigrants. The only difference is that the immigrants have been granted access while the asylum seeker has not. Asylum seekers here do the same as the immigrant, they sell drugs, which is generally why they're here. And by "immigrant", I mean Africans exclusively here. Out of 100 asylum seekers in that shelter, they are all Africans.

But yeah, keep thinking asylum and immigration are completely unrelated and that it's not about going to another country.

>>4752

>So what if I receive the communion in a state of mortal sin?

It's simple: you go to hell forever.

>>4752

>That's it? They will literally fight God and go to heaven?

Yes, and you, for having eaten the body of Christ in a state of mortal sin (such as drinking alcohol or missing mass) will rot in hell forever because God loves you.

Catholicism: where fighting God is literally less dangerous than missing mass once or drinking the Holy Blood because it's alcohol, and a drug, and therefore a mortal sin. Enjoy!

>>4824

>So perhaps asylum and immigration are very different things where you live, but in other places it's just a modality of the same thing: moving to another country.

No. This is not the situation in law. I am sure that the law is abused but it is wrong to give in to this wrongdoing and accept it. Asylum is not immigration and the people that want to change this are criminals.

>But yeah, keep thinking asylum and immigration are completely unrelated and that it's not about going to another country.

I will because this is what asylum means.

>>4825

>>4827

You are like an annoying child.

You always remember me of the Liberals that go on about white =Catholic in your case guilt and never mention anything else, distort reality and come up with anything that affirms your already shaped world view.

>>4832

>You are like an annoying child.

I'm just speaking the way you do, to yourself, so you get to feel what every non-Catholic has to take from you on a daily basis.

I'm glad to see you don't like it one bit more than we do.

>>4854

>I'm just speaking the way you do

I do not distort reality, I hold actual opinions that are too offensive for you. Which won't make them go away.

You mistake being true to one's beliefs with trying to provoce.

>>4752

Also I know the answers here of course. But I would have been interested in the way he explains it. If I ask something it does not mean I don't know it, and if I defend a position it does not mean I hold it.

>>4856

>I do not distort reality, I hold actual opinions that are too offensive for you. Which won't make them go away.

Indeed, so you have the benefit of knowing that I didn't really mean it, while others don't benefit from that, they know you actually mean it. The point being, nobody can know for sure, and that's where other people get as annoyed as you do when I tell you your own stuff.

>You mistake being true to one's beliefs with trying to provoce.

Giving you a taste of your own medicine, in a lighter form, since you know I'm just pretending to be you. It's just forced empathy. Think about it next time you patronise a non-Catholic. Maybe you'll present things in a way that doesn't guarantee immediate antagonising.

Milk before meat, right? I think that's in the Bible.

>But I would have been interested in the way he explains it

I know, but don't hold your breath.

> If I ask something it does not mean I don't know it, and if I defend a position it does not mean I hold it.

I am aware of that, but please keep in mind that the same goes for me, and that asking questions about Universalism or Vatican II doesn't mean I condone either.

>>4904

>But then he wouldn’t be catholic.

Do you care more about appearing Catholic or actually saving souls? The former, obviously. That's just pride.

>Wine just meant something else back then, innit?

No, it meant the same, but Jesus never said wine was a mortal sin, that's the difference.

>True, being perfect as the father meant something else back then, too.

Nobody mentioned your filthy practice here, friend. It's not mentioned in the Bible either, but your projective powers have no limits.

>Having a cake and eating it, I think that’s not part of christian mentality.

I don't think you understand what milk before meat means. Won't be the first thing you don't understand.

>>4908

>Jesus never said wine was a mortal sin

Neither does the church OR St. Paul. What are you even proving here?

>Nobody mentioned your filthy practice here

>implying you aren’t an ardent defender of masturbation

Liar.

>milk before meat

I know what it means but the church doesn’t obscurantise. I think the summa theologica and the catechism are open for everyone to access. The thing is: you don’t need to know why to believe in a mysterium. That is a faith that is alive, a faith in “fairy tales” and a living God who is cloaked in bread. Ungraspable.

>Having a cake and eating it, I think that’s not part of christian mentality.

You don’t get to let someone taste their own medicine, is what I am saying. If injustice occured to you, you cannot go for a payback and pretend you are doing it in Christs name.

8chan is fucking up. Even Lazarus cannot recover my post anymore. Do you have it? Screencap it or pastebin it please.

>>4911

>Neither does the church OR St. Paul. What are you even proving here?

We both agree that alcohol is a drug, right? I don't have to convince you of that fact, correct? Am I wrong to say that drugs are listed as a mortal sin by your Church? y/n

>implying you aren’t an ardent defender of masturbation

I guess it turns you on to think so, eh? A vigorous defenser of the 5 to 1. That said, I didn't lie: literally nobody mentioned masturbation here until you did. Isn't that so? Who's the liar now? You.

>ctrl + F

>first person to say masturbation is you

Careful, man, you're getting obsessed. Also remember that false testimony thing, don't do it.

>I think the summa theologica and the catechism are open for everyone to access.

Bold claim for someone who struggles reading chan posts.

>The thing is: you don’t need to know why to believe in a mysterium.

As with much of your faith, convenient.

>That is a faith that is alive, a faith in “fairy tales” and a living God who is cloaked in bread. Ungraspable.

It only counts when it's your fairy tales, not anybody else's, I know.

>You don’t get to let someone taste their own medicine

OK…

>>4912

>8chan is fucking up. Even Lazarus cannot recover my post anymore. Do you have it? Screencap it or pastebin it please.

Don't worry, we have it twice and I've already responded to it.

>>4914

If we have it twice, screencap or pastebin it. Because it’s just local for you, as it was local for me.

>>4916

Answer these and I'll see what I can do:

>>4910

>>4915

>>4919

The one before.

>>4921

This one?

>>4904

There's nothing else in between.

>>4923

Yes

>>4930

Thanks.

>>4932

You're welcome.

>>4523

You should read zizek, heck at least hear his 10 minutes vid on PC which he talks about it

>>4940

>You should read zizek

Possibly. Why?

>eck at least hear his 10 minutes vid on PC which he talks about it

Link?

>>4928

>>4930

I commit mortal sins quite regulary. So I'd have to go to confession each sunday morning before mass. But there is none held and I'd had to go to the capital for the next one which would take me about an hour and make it impossible to attend my local parish

What do?

I just mean… if the Church doesn't take it this seriously, if they did they'd hold confession each sunday, why should I? Lies this within my responsibility?

Also what if I miss something at confession? If I just forget it?

If I wouldn't dare to say something?

So it would be better to not take communion at all and confess commiting sacrilege asap?

>4966

All excellent questions which I have once asked, maybe even to you.

Padre Pio thinks it's OK, if we mess up, He's got our back.

>>4966

I am glad that checked this thread for your reply. It would have pained me to find this on sunday afternoon.

>I commit mortal sins quite regulary

We’re all in that boat, probably. As my confessor would say: 'It is a battle'. It is one of the things keeping me from becoming a priest. I am currently in sin, too

There are two ways for this and I hope you answer before I go to mass tomorrow so that I can reply. First question: Novus ordo? No bias here, as I explained once earlier without my flag on, second question: is there a monastery or at least some some orthodox as opposed to heterodox congregation somewhere near you?

Now my answer to your question: you could ask a priest you know will give proper counsel for confessions every fortnight.

You could truly go before sunday mass, as I am thinking I might do tomorrow, thanks to praying the rosary.

And you should not go to communion under any circumstances, if in mortal sin. Or if you are having doubts about something, maybe if you had a bottle of beer too much yesterday.

This is painful, and I know what you are talking about, as this is how I have been doing it for this year as one of my NY resolutions after a priest told me that it is sacrilege. And I don’t ever want to do it again, it’s the worst feeling. It is, to me, the greatest desire ti receive the Lord in the blessed sacrament, I will not lie. Communion most of the time is the only solace in Novus Ordo mass because you have to endure a lot sometimes. I am glad that since I understand mass more of an unbloody sacrifice and act of penance, too, that this dampens the pointlessness of a sinner being among the faithful. I am not surprised that everyone goes if they think it’s the sole purpose of mass.

Until Pius X. told the laity to dare receiving what they NEED as often as they can, people barely even went to receive it out of awe.

Anyway, everyone goes? Let them look at you, it’s not their concern. They’re probably doing somethign really dumb. In my EF parish, that I usually attend, so many people don’t go to communion that nobody heeds any weird thoughts. After all, since everyone goes in Novus Ordo, WHAT WOULD THAT BOY HAVE DONE?!?!?!?!?!? Fuck these inverted tax collectors

Mind that you aren’t being judged, I have been there, too.

>>4976

>Padre Pio thinks it's OK, if we mess up

Yeah, he also denied absolution to people who weren’t contrite—which he could read from their souls. Messing up shouldn’t be routine.

And yes, Zizek is great. Probably the only communist who understands Christianity. Watch 'a perverts guide to ideology', it’s really good.

>>5016

>Novus ordo?

Yes, my local priest does it like this. I have never even talked with him about that though, might ask him for the reason.

>second question: is there a monastery or at least some some orthodox as opposed to heterodox congregation somewhere near you?

Not sure. Probably not. Depends on what "near" is. If near is two hours by car, then possibly.

I'm not even sure which the next monastary is, nor how I would approach there. Just knock? Phone them? Write a letter?

> you could ask a priest you know will give proper counsel for confessions every fortnight.

I would have to look for this priest though. Maybe my priest can do something, if I ask him. Will see when I get to talk with him.

>Anyway, everyone goes? Let them look at you, it’s not their concern. They’re probably doing somethign really dumb. In my EF parish, that I usually attend, so many people don’t go to communion that nobody heeds any weird thoughts. After all, since everyone goes in Novus Ordo, WHAT WOULD THAT BOY HAVE DONE?!?!?!?!?!? Fuck these inverted tax collectors

I'm 100% sure that no one is aware here that you are not to receive it in a state of mortal sin.

The only ones not receiving it are children and "divorced" here.

What does count as a mortal sin exactly?

and

>>4966

>I just mean… if the Church doesn't take it this seriously, if they did they'd hold confession each sunday, why should I? Lies this within my responsibility?

And especially:

>Also what if I miss something at confession? If I just forget it?

>If I wouldn't dare to say something?

What if I confess everything and forgot this one time I was drunk 2 years ago on this tuesday because it doesn't matter any more?

Are sins forgiven if they are not explicitly mentioned?

We should return to the practice of colonialism and shepherd these people in their own countries.

>>5058

Yes

>>4966

>Why?

because understanding others peoples views in interesting and an imperative if w dont want to become a hugbox

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5dNbWGaaxWM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0OzL0tGygso

>>5051

> might ask him for the reason

Don’t, causes too much trouble, probably.

>Just knock? Phone them? Write a letter? [write a mail?

Either any of those or check their website, confessional times should be available there.

>I'm 100% sure that no one is aware here that you are not to receive it in a state of mortal sin.

Either that, they haven’t been taught or they are just too apathetic.

>sin

http://www.baltimore-catechism.com/lesson6.htm

>The only ones not receiving it are children and "divorced" here.

Children could receive it, if baptised.

>if the Church doesn't take it this seriously… why should I

Because we need to go back to the times where we don’t have to pry into the sacristy to ask for a sacrament that is more important than communion. By showing that there is a need for it, things will change.

>If I wouldn't dare to say something?

That’s why there is a priest, he might guide you through it.

As long as you aren’t holding anything back on purpose, you are are absolved of all your sins. If you remember something you need to confess, you can always do it next time. If you are holding things back on purpose that’s another sin and makes the whole confession invalid.

This all seems more serious than it is. After all you are facing Christ, who has probably heard worse in his time. Before confession, pray to the Holy Spirit for clarity. Include the priest who is hearing it.

>>5068

>Don’t, causes too much trouble, probably.

Asking my local priest on matters of religion does? I think I could deal with that.

>Either any of those or check their website, confessional times should be available there.

Will see.

>Children could receive it, if baptised.

Could they really?

Here they are not allowed to before their initiation. It is a big traditional festivity where they are meant to learn basic principles of the faith and after that be "real" members of community.

>As long as you aren’t holding anything back on purpose, you are are absolved of all your sins.

Really? That's interesting.

Confession is not that common here in general. People receive it about once or twice a year, usually at easter.

>>5090

>I think I could deal with that.

Are there many people in your parish? Describe mass.

>Here they are not allowed to before their initiation

Same here, but only baptism is required. Technically, you have to believe in real presence, but I doubt I did that with 8-9.

Yeah, you only have to do it once a year. On easter. For wide is the gate and people won’t sin :^)

"The same holy council teaches that little children who have not attained the use of reason are not by any necessity bound to the sacramental communion of the Eucharist; for having been regenerated by the laver of baptism and thereby incorporated with Christ, they cannot at that age lose the grace of the sons of God already acquired. Antiquity is not therefore to be condemned, however, if in some places it at one time observed that custom. For just as those most holy Fathers had acceptable ground for what they did under the circumstances, so it is certainly to be accepted without controversy that they regarded it as not necessary to salvation." (Council of Trent, Sess. XXI, Chapter iv)

=> Children could receive communion, but it’s not necessary anyway. Not sure if it would be illicit.

>>5094

>Are there many people in your parish? Describe mass.

A couple of dozens that regulary attend, at most a hundred I'd say.

At easter or Christmas it's more though, like 500 probably.

>Describe mass.

What should I describe? It's just a Novus Ordo Mass, arent they everywhere the same?

There is stuff happening that's bad though. Altar girls, Women reading out gospel stories/ "preaches", feel good stuff with children, but the worst is that sometimes the communion is handed out by a laywoman. I do not take it from here. Fuck that even if it's offensive to here damn feelings but for me that is on the edge of blasphemy and highly doubt that the communion is even valid.

There are also marriages blessed between believers and unbelievers without the demand for ALL children to become Catholics.

In the last years it has also started that people cremate their death and want them to be buried on our cemetry.

Also murderers and people that commited suicide not that there was a difference have been buried there in the last years.

But I have seen worse in the city tbh. Applauding in Church for instance.

>Yeah, you only have to do it once a year. On easter. For wide is the gate and people won’t sin :^)

And if I only received the Eucharist there then?

>>5066

Interesting. But his accent is annoying.

>>5116

> Maybe he has long been crushed by overbearing laity or employees.

I blame the diocese and the bishop.

>You should tell the priest that women are not allowed to read the gospel, that’s a privilege of the clergy. Same as homilies.

I just do not feel like a layman should lecture hi priest. It feels so wrong.

>>5118

pls cease making look Christians like homos by misquoting scripture out of context.

>>Be kind to one another, tenderhearted, forgiving one another, as God in Christ forgave you.

Among your community, it is advice to the Ephesians how to handle their community of Christians. Not how to deal with the enemy.

>>But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, self-control; against such things there is no law.

Indeed. And because you love the Modernist you have to destroy modernism.

>>To one who strikes you on the cheek, offer the other also, and from one who takes away your cloak do not withhold your tunic either.

Refers not to actual striking but to an offense towards your honour.

It is also hyperbole and no good advice how to behave in a battle.

>>There is no fear in love, but perfect love casts out fear. For fear has to do with punishment, and whoever fears has not been perfected in love.

There are different types of fear and some have to be avoided while others are just fine

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/06021a.htm

>>5123

If you do it with the magisterium… the other way is sending a letter to the bishop, which stirs up shit. Or is ineffectious

Oh, you could just lecture the woman who reads the evangelium not if she just does the readings. In private. It’s called fraternal correction and isn’t intolerant or anything. If she refuses, talk to the priest about it and then ask him to enforce this.

I take it you’re American. I am not even anglophone, tbh.

>>5125

>I take it you’re American

>honour

No, you are either a brit or not anglophone at all, sorry.

>>5123

>pls cease making look Christians like homos by misquoting scripture out of context.

"For the time is coming when people will not endure sound teaching, but having itching ears they will accumulate for themselves teachers to suit their own passions, and will turn away from listening to the truth and wander off into myths."

2 Timothy 4:3-4

>>5123

>Indeed. And because you love the Modernist you have to destroy modernism.

"I appeal to you, brothers, to watch out for those who cause divisions and create obstacles contrary to the doctrine that you have been taught; avoid them. For such persons do not serve our Lord Christ, but their own appetites, and by smooth talk and flattery they deceive the hearts of the naive."

Romans 16:17-18

"If anyone teaches a different doctrine and does not agree with the sound words of our Lord Jesus Christ and the teaching that accords with godliness, he is puffed up with conceit and understands nothing. He has an unhealthy craving for controversy and for quarrels about words, which produce envy, dissension, slander, evil suspicions, and constant friction among people who are depraved in mind and deprived of the truth, imagining that godliness is a means of gain."

1 Timothy 6:3-5

>Refers not to actual striking but to an offense towards your honour.

>It is also hyperbole and no good advice how to behave in a battle.

"For the time is coming when people will not endure sound teaching, but having itching ears they will accumulate for themselves teachers to suit their own passions, and will turn away from listening to the truth and wander off into myths."

2 Timothy 4:3-4

>>5127

>who cause divisions and create obstacles contrary to the doctrine that you have been taught

Yes, modernists.

>he is puffed up with conceit and understands nothing

Modernists.

>>5125

>the other way is sending a letter to the bishop, which stirs up shit

I feel like he's behind this anyway. He's one of the types that want to get with the times and diologue with the laity.

>Oh, you could just lecture the woman who reads the evangelium not if she just does the readings. In private. It’s called fraternal correction and isn’t intolerant or anything. If she refuses, talk to the priest about it and then ask him to enforce this.

He let's her do it and I am to forbid it to her? Why should she take my advice before the priest's?

>>5126

>>5108

>>That and the U.S. is a pithole of all the human species and sub-species

>>5127

I have a problem in general with people quoting scripture all the time, but you could at least give some effort into it:

>>5127

>"For the time is coming when people will not endure sound teaching, but having itching ears they will accumulate for themselves teachers to suit their own passions, and will turn away from listening to the truth and wander off into myths."

So quoting a single verse is "sound teaching" ?

>>5127

>"I appeal to you, brothers, to watch out for those who cause divisions and create obstacles contrary to the doctrine that you have been taught; avoid them. For such persons do not serve our Lord Christ, but their own appetites, and by smooth talk and flattery they deceive the hearts of the naive."

>

>Romans 16:17-18

>

>"If anyone teaches a different doctrine and does not agree with the sound words of our Lord Jesus Christ and the teaching that accords with godliness, he is puffed up with conceit and understands nothing. He has an unhealthy craving for controversy and for quarrels about words, which produce envy, dissension, slander, evil suspicions, and constant friction among people who are depraved in mind and deprived of the truth, imagining that godliness is a means of gain."

>

>1 Timothy 6:3-5

These are very good ammunition against modernism and heresy which modernism is you know?

>"For the time is coming when people will not endure sound teaching, but having itching ears they will accumulate for themselves teachers to suit their own passions, and will turn away from listening to the truth and wander off into myths."

So interpreting a verse how it was meant is no sound teaching again?

>>5131

>I have a problem in general with people quoting scripture all the time

Because of stuff like this:

>>5109

>0:48

>the KJV is my final authority

No it's not. Even if you used a proper translation it was not.

God is your final authority, not the bible.

>>5131

You don’t want to forbid her but you want her to consider what she is doing. You should stress that. Sugarcoat it, if necessary.

Lectress in general are overbearing, it seems.

I asked for your whereabouts because I could find out where a TLM is.

>>5134

>Sugarcoat it, if necessary.

How would I do that? If I said anything she would probably think of me as some reactionary true tbh that wants to surpress strong independent wymin.

>I asked for your whereabouts because I could find out where a TLM is.

I never made it a secret that I am Austrian.

>>5136

>I never made it a secret that I am Austrian.

http://www.fssp.org/de/messes.htm#%C3%96sterreich

About two hours by car from me.

http://www.fsspx.at/de/content/3275

One of them would be about twenty minutes from me… but it is FSSPX.

>>5137

Das Fühl, wenn Marmeladinger.

Just go SSPX then. However, you cannot confess there (._. )

Or check here: http://www.pro-missa-tridentina.de/heilige-messen/regelmaessige-gottesdienste_2.htm

>>5138

damn 8chan

Anyway, what was important in my post:

How valid is SSPX?

>>5140

>damn 8chan

Am I the only one that recently has problems with it recently btw? It just deletes my posts, is down, takes long to submitt and is a pain to use in general.

>>5140

I personally rarely go to the SSPX I said in an earlier post that I just use it to signify me being a traditionalist but indeed they should fulfill the sunday obligation.

Quote (from SSPX website though)

>This reply was made to a inquiry made by a family about whether attending Mass at an SSPX chapel would serve to fulfilled their Sunday Obligation:

> According to the New Code of Canon Law, “The obligation of assisting at Mass is satisfied wherever Mass is celebrated in a Catholic rite….” I hope that settles your doubts."

>>5141

Well, I have the same problems every now and then. If only I had remained ITT, then I would have gotten your post anyway.

>>5142

>but indeed they should fulfill the sunday obligation.

But can they spend the sacraments? Also I am not sure if I approve of what they are doing, this sounds a lot like rebellion to me. While I agree with their intentions fully I'm not sure if I can support their methods. The FSSP on the other hand seems genuinly good to me. I might visit them when I'm in Vienna next time.

>>5138

>Das Fühl, wenn Marmeladinger.

It must be hard to be a catholic there. Your clergy is one of the worst, depending on where you are exactly though, I assume.

http://www.katholisches.info/2015/05/16/bdkj-sprecher-agiert-als-homolobbyist-zdk-fordert-vorbehaltlose-akzeptanz/

>>5143

Yeah, that’s what I said earlier about sacramental grace. It’s not necessary for the priest to be free of sin, it is grace achieved by reception, through the action. And even suspended clergy can validly consecrate bread and wine. Confirmation and penance require a mission by the bishop which they most likely won’t have.

You should do this, btw, at least standing, it strengthens the belief in real presence

>sounds a lot like rebellion to me

They would say the same if you knelt to receive communion on the tongue, probably.

>their methods

I agree, the bishop consecrations in 1988 where shameful and gave cause for the foundation of the Fraternity of St. Peter but Pope Benedict XVI lifted their excommunications in 2011 or so. The FSSPX are doing us a favour by drawing people away from the collects, the only thing that modernist bishops care about.

>>5144

Yes, Germany is sodom. All these committees should be dissolved. Hierarchical "democracy" has no place in a hierarchical institution. What powers could an organisation I haven’t asked for have on me? Whenever I see 'mass for ZdK or KDFB', some of my veins explode.

>>5116

too bad that pope is at odds withe the current church :^)

>>5151

The pope is too tolerant of things to be at odds with anything, including the 'current' church. Including the SSPX.

1/5, I replied