Katholic Kiwi Kathedral (Catholocism General) - Byzantine? Ethnic? Roman? It doesn't matter. It's a place for Catholic Kiwis to discuss Catholicism and inquirers to inquire

[Local Farmer]

I do perceive baptism to be a formal initiation ritual into a religion

Well we don’t and Vance shouldn’t either so I hold him to those standards

 

[ANightOwl]

I'm completely serious. I think you should be able to SHARE your religion with your children, but I find compulsory attendance/participation in rituals like mass, baptism, circumcision, etc. to be distasteful (I wouldn't use the word "abusive," that's too dramatic).

I am not Catholic, I am a feature-tourist come to see what's up with the New Pope and see what the Catholic perspective is on him. I do perceive baptism to be a formal initiation ritual into a religion.

Well, it isn't. That's confirmation and it's done as an adult. Baptismal rites are not initiation into the Christian religion, it's one of many prot heresies.

 

[Großmann]

I'm completely serious. I think you should be able to SHARE your religion with your children, but I find compulsory attendance/participation in rituals like mass, baptism, circumcision, etc. to be distasteful (I wouldn't use the word "abusive," that's too dramatic).

Yeah but I asked you what we should force on our children.

 

[Local Farmer]

I'm completely serious. I think you should be able to SHARE your religion with your children, but I find compulsory attendance/participation in rituals like mass, baptism, circumcision, etc. to be distasteful (I wouldn't use the word "abusive," that's too dramatic).

I am not Catholic, I am a feature-tourist come to see what's up with the New Pope and see what the Catholic perspective is on him. I do perceive baptism to be a formal initiation ritual into a religion.

I’m going through this out there before we get derailed, Well I disagree with Ring of Basilius, I think it’s uncharitable to negrate or berate him for his posts

 

[ANightOwl]

I’m going through this out there before we get derailed, Well I disagree with Ring of Basilius, I think it’s uncharitable to negrate or berate him for his posts

Nah man, the "don't baptise children they can't choose" thing is up there with "you guys worship saints and the pope instead of christ."

I'm kinda done letting heretics dictate the conversation from a place of ignorance. Even if we should be nice to thread tourists.

 

[insensitive]

Yeah this guy is a fucking retard.
View attachment 7336002View attachment 7336005View attachment 7336006
View attachment 7335999
I cant wait to hear MORE cope from you zealous idiots. HAVE FUN, you only have to wait 15 more years to roll the (stacked) dice again

I wait 2 fucking hours and no one responds to this, I just get a bunch of negative reactions. Do you guys like eating shit? Because we're going to mock and ridicule this idiot until something changes.

 

[Local Farmer]

Nah man, the "don't baptise children they can't choose" thing is up there with "you guys worship saints and the pope instead of christ."

I'm kinda done letting heretics dictate the conversation from a place of ignorance. Even if we should be nice to thread tourists.

I’m going to assume ignorance over actual malice in his intent. This thread is also for Inquirers to inquire so we shouldn’t assume hostility until proven otherwise

 

[Mound Dweller]

I wait 2 fucking hours and no one responds to this, I just get a bunch of negative reactions. Do you guys like eating shit? Because we're going to mock and ridicule this idiot until something changes.

Here you go pal; you're not asking a question or discussing a relevant topic, you're just pissing in the communion wine so to speak, enjoy your interdiction.
Go forth and multiply, as they say.

 

[Local Farmer]

I wait 2 fucking hours and no one responds to this, I just get a bunch of negative reactions. Do you guys like eating shit? Because we're going to mock and ridicule this idiot until something changes.

View attachment 7273795
NON EXPEDIT!

BY PAPAL DECREE OF I, BISHOP LOCAL FARMER, HEREBY DECLARE ANATHEMA TO ANYONE RESPONDING TO FRENCH DIP, SHOULD FRENCH DIP SPEAK OUT OF LINE AGAIN WE WILL PHOTOSHOP HIS HANDS ON TO MORE AND MORE LUDICROUS PLACES

​

Seriously Guys, he’s not going to listen or care, there is no thread moderator so of course we’re going to get retards like him. Just downvote and ignore them going forward.

if you guys want to argue about catholicism, go to Mass Debates or something. -Null

Cool man, then leave

 

[insensitive]

Here you go pal; you're not asking a question or discussing a relevant topic, you're just pissing in the communion wine so to speak, enjoy your interdiction.
Go forth and multiply, as they say.

I'm desperately trying to figure out why so many people in this thread are optimistic about this choice, because unless you guys like the destruction of your institution this seems like awful news.

What is to like about this guy other than him being a fresh face to the papacy? Cause hes not conservative, at least in the sense of keeping foreign invaders away. He might be slightly better than francis at maintaining church tradition but thats a pretty low bar.

Cool man, then leave

I'm not arguing the merits of Catholicism, none of the threads on this site are meant purely for glazing (except for the synthetic man one for some reason). This merits discussion in this thread.

 

[Mound Dweller]

What is to like about this guy other than him being a fresh face to the papacy?

He speaks English and isn't fucking eyetalian that's a pretty good start IMO, he's also a registered republican lol.
Anyway you're shitpoking in bad faith so away with ye, anathema!

 

[California Newt]

Well, it isn't. That's confirmation and it's done as an adult. Baptismal rites are not initiation into the Christian religion, it's one of many prot heresies.

It's only reserved until the "age of confirmation" in the Latin West, and that was a later development resulting from the West's later conflation of the intellect with the nous. In the Early Church the mystery of Chrismation happened at the time of Baptism, as it still does in the East.

I wait 2 fucking hours and no one responds to this, I just get a bunch of negative reactions. Do you guys like eating shit? Because we're going to mock and ridicule this idiot until something changes.

My bad; I neglected to agree-react.

 

[Großmann]

I'm desperately trying to figure out why so many people in this thread are optimistic about this choice, because unless you guys like the destruction of your institution this seems like awful news.

What is to like about this guy other than him being a fresh face to the papacy? Cause hes not conservative, at least in the sense of keeping foreign invaders away. He might be slightly better than francis at maintaining church tradition but thats a pretty low bar.


I'm not arguing the merits of Catholicism, none of the threads on this site are meant purely for glazing (except for the synthetic man one for some reason). This merits discussion in this thread.

No one wants to talk to you because you already played your hand pages ago. We know you came to stir up shit and not actually have a discussion or else this wouldn’t have been how you chose to enter the thread:

will he immediately start kissing the feet of immigrants or will we have to wait at least a few months?

 

[insensitive]

He speaks English and isn't fucking eyetalian that's a pretty good start IMO, he's also a registered republican lol.

You forgot to mention hes white.

also if you think any of those tweets I posted screen caps of indicate that hes a republican you're lost.

No one wants to talk to you because you already played your hand pages ago. We know you came to stir up shit and not actually have a discussion or else this wouldn’t have been how you chose to enter the thread:

I posted that not actually knowing much about him just as a dig at francis, I didn't know that was actually going to be the case.

If that qualifies as stirring shit then most of you don't participate in any discourse on this site.

 

[Local Farmer]

I'm desperately trying to figure out why so many people in this thread are optimistic about this choice, because unless you guys like the destruction of your institution this seems like awful news.

What is to like about this guy other than him being a fresh face to the papacy? Cause hes not conservative, at least in the sense of keeping foreign invaders away. He might be slightly better than francis at maintaining church tradition but thats a pretty low bar.


I'm not arguing the merits of Catholicism, none of the threads on this site are meant purely for glazing (except for the synthetic man one for some reason). This merits discussion in this thread.

Brother you came in here hot as hell and now you expect a respectful discussion? Nah man, we will have the discussion but I won’t take you seriously

 

[Großmann]

If that qualifies as stirring shit then most of you don't participate in any discourse on this site.

How are you confused that people on the Deep Thoughts board don’t enjoy retarded /pol/-style posts?

 

[Tinidril]

Coming from a native of NYC as well as a cradle Catholic, I don't know who said "In Essentials Unity, In Non-Essentials Liberty, In All Things Charity", but even the Pope can't make me refer to Chicago-style deep-dish pizza as "pizza"! (Jon Stewart had much to say on this topic.)

I have no opinions on the Bulls, the White Sox, the Bears, the Blackhawks, or the Cubs.

Other than that, God bless our new Pope. I'm very happy, wherever he's from.

 

[Squid Diddler]

@California Newt
(reply bug)

You are doing the classic “durr how can pope be bad and be pope”. Popes have been bad. We will continue to have bad ones. There have been far worse than you have mentioned, murderers, deviants, you name it. Humans are base creatures to our core, welcome to Catholicism.

You misunderstand my point- Honorious was at most guilty of personal heresy- nothing was ex cathedra, and infallibility was not engaged. Indefectibility protects official church teaching, not personal beliefs so there was no “formal heresy.” You are cherry-picking and ignoring how any of this actually works. Catholic theology distinguishes between a pope’s personal failings and his official acts- Honorius did not issue a doctrinal definition promoting Monothelitism. His letters avoided taking a clear stance, which was harmful, but it did not constitute an infallible proclamation. The condemnation was posthumous, for actions that did not engage infallibility, and it served to clarify orthodoxy, not to depose a sitting pope. Furthermore, his letters were not widely circulated during his lifetime and their impact was limited until the council revisited them posthumously. Here is a much better source than wikipedo that explains things far better than I can. As for the ecumenical council, I'm not sure how you can seek to undermine the papacy by citing a papally authorized council whose main goal with this was to uphold the orthodoxy and correct Honorius’ error, thereby reinforcing the Church’s indefectibility.

As for Leo, you are really showing your lack of understanding here of both theology and history. I already answered this fully, the inscription lacked ex cathedra status because it was a localized, symbolic act, which precludes it from being an "Ex Cathedra" statement which must:

• Have the pope address the universal Church in his official capacity
• Explicitly define a doctrine
• Clearly intend the teaching to be obligatory for all Catholics, invoking his supreme authority
• Speak with definitive intent

At the end of the day, Leo fully supported the filioque ("it is forbidden not to believe such a great mystery of the faith"), he just didn't think it was 100% necessary to always be included in the creed. The burden of proof is on you for thinking putting up a fancy decoration means "this is the definitive end all be all proclamation of all Catholic teaching forevermore" or something. His referencing of the "Orthodox Faith” likely refers to the Creed’s conciliar integrity, not a rejection of the filioque’s theology.

The fact that you try preempt my thousands-of-years-old points by saying I am trying to wriggle out of the exact topic we are discussing in order to cover the gaps in your own and then saying that my argument is somehow wrong because it supports my worldview (duh dude) proves that you are arguing in bad faith and I have already wasted way too much time on your dumb ass. Have a good one, if you're actually curious there is a wealth of information out there on this topic (literal thousands of years worth, as I mentioned) but I know you're not, you just came into the Catholic thread hoping to dunk on papists. Get fucked.

 

[California Newt]

No one wants to talk to you because you already played your hand pages ago. We know you came to stir up shit and not actually have a discussion or else this wouldn’t have been how you chose to enter the thread:

Anyway you're shitpoking in bad faith so away with ye, anathema

Thought-terminating cliche.

I posted that not actually knowing much about him just as a dig at francis, I didn't know that was actually going to be the case.

If that qualifies as stirring shit then most of you don't participate in any discourse on this site.

Online Catholics will express mild concern over their new Pope's history of sweeping up for pedophiles and acting in accordance with the wishes of anti-western, anti-Christian NGOs in the same breath as posting heartwarming memes about him and "holding out hope he'll be good". They've been bred to be this way for centuries, and it's a miracle that we see so many leave for greener pastures.

If you express your concerns about the Pope in anything other than glowing parasocial paternal terms, they'll accuse you of bad faith and stick their heads in the sand.

They're elite tone-policers.

 

[Großmann]

Thought-terminating cliche.

No, shouting /pol/ talking points and throwing insults is a thought terminator. Next time you want to question someone on what they believe, try not being a giant faggot about it and people will bother taking time engaging with you on the belief that you’re interested in a thoughtful discussion.