₦airaland Forum

Maureenurch: I belong to the Purgatorian society

ya, that was my society in school.
may their souls rest in peace!

Deep Soul: Men are just insatiable. Some of them even go as far as repeatedly having unprotected sex with women who arent their wives thus exposing innocent women to all sorts.

Na God they save person.

Prayer: Lord, please give me a good man.

if ur less than 23 then am interested. am not joking

Bidam: Can you answer the question without asking questions?

abeg, my guy bidam, i c u dont know what to say again. lol
i joined the catholic church because i was born into it and i remained there because am convinced its the true church founded by christ which can only teach me the complete truth.

Mescopaul: True married men do so..., now ans dis " Did married men pledge celibacy?"

The issue is that Rev Fathers should not and never do it because " by being a priest they've pledged celibacy for the rest of their lives". Got it?? ?

its a pity, so u believe dat a celibate should not fall to sexual sin but a married man should.smh

VATICAN CITY (AP) — Pope Francis offered
an olive branch of sorts to the doctrine-
minded, conservative wing of the Catholic
Church on Friday as he denounced
abortions as a symptom of today's "throw-
away culture" and encouraged Catholic
doctors to refuse to perform them.
Francis issued a strong anti-abortion
message and cited Vatican teaching on the
need to defend the unborn during an
audience with Catholic gynecologists.
It came a day after he was quoted as
blasting the church's obsession with
"small-minded rules" that are driving the
faithful away. In an interview that has
sent shockwaves through the church,
Francis urged its pastors to focus on being
merciful and welcoming rather than
insisting only on such divisive, hot-button
issues as abortion, gay marriage and
contraception.
Even before the interview was published,
some conservatives had voiced
disappointment that Francis had shied
away from restating such church rules.
Francis explained his reason for doing so
in the interview with the Jesuit journal La
Civilta Cattolica, saying church teaching on
such issues is well-known, he supports it,
but that he doesn't feel it necessary to
repeat it constantly.
He did repeat it on Friday, however. In his
comments, Francis denounced today's
"throw-away culture" that justifies
disposing of lives, and said doctors in
particular had been forced into situations
where they are called to "not respect life."
"Every child that isn't born, but is unjustly
condemned to be aborted, has the face of
Jesus Christ, has the face of the Lord," he
said.
He urged the gynecologists to abide by their
consciences and help bring lives into the
world. "Things have a price and can be for
sale, but people have a dignity that is
priceless and worth far more than things,"
he said.
Francis' comments to Civilta Cattolica
contained no change in church teaching,
but they represented a radical shift in tone
and stood in stark contrast to the priorities
of his two immediate predecessors.
John Paul II and Benedict XVI were both
intellectuals for whom doctrine was
paramount, an orientation that guided the
selection of a generation of bishops and
cardinals who, in countries like the United
States, have put themselves on the front
lines in opposing abortion and gay
marriage. They now find themselves being
asked to preach more to those who have
fallen away from the church and offer
them a compassionate welcome home.
Greg Burke, the Vatican's senior
communications adviser, insisted Friday
that Francis was by no means calling into
question the papacies and priorities of his
predecessors.
"The pope is not condemning his
predecessors," Burke told The Associated
Press. "What he is saying is 'We've spent a
lot of time talking about the boundaries.
We've spent a lot of time talking about
what is sin and what's not. Now let's move
on. Let's talk about mercy. Let's talk about
love.'"
Dublin Archbishop Diarmuid Martin,
Ireland's most reform-minded Catholic
leader, said Francis' comments will be
tough for the church to put into action
because there is a tendency to get "trapped"
into the right and wrong, white and black
of Catholic teaching.
"It's a way of thinking that will actually be
very hard for the right and the left of the
church, either of them, to accept," he told
RTE radio. But he said Francis wasn't
dismissing everything that has been taught
to date.
"He's saying let's move in a different
direction."
Bishop Thomas Tobin of Providence, Rhode
Island, just last week had said in an
interview with his diocesan newspaper
that he was "a little bit disappointed" that
Francis hadn't spoken out about abortion.
On Friday, in an official statement
responding to the La Civilta Cattolica
article, Tobin said he admired Francis'
leadership.
"Being a Catholic doesn't mean having to
choose between doctrine and charity,
between truth and love. It includes both.
We are grateful to Pope Francis for
reminding us of that vision," he said.
U.S. Cardinal Timothy Dolan, who as head
of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops
has taken a lead role in voicing the U.S.
church's opposition to contraception and
gay marriage, said the church isn't the
only one obsessed with such issues —
today's culture is.
"Every pope has a different strategy,"
Dolan told "CBS This Morning." ''What I
think he's saying is, 'Those are important
issues and the church has got to keep
talking about them, but we need to talk
about them in a fresh new way. If we keep
kind of a negative finger-wagging tone, it's
counterproductive. "
He said that while Francis had sent
shockwaves throughout the church, clearly
it was necessary.
"Every day I think, 'Thank God he was
elected.' ... Every day I say, 'This man is
batting a thousand.'"
___
Tricia Thomas in Rome, Rachel Zoll in New
York and Shawn Pogatchnik in Dublin
contributed.
___
Follow Nicole Winfield at
www.twitter.com/nwinfield

Sal C: I understand where you are coming from but I want ask ...

Did you take the statistic of these erring priests as against the total number of priests before opening this thread?
Do you think doing away with celibacy will eradicate illicit sex in the world, or better still among the men of God?

Yes this topic might be for priests and celibacy but that doesn't mean we will not bring in useful instances when necessary.
Again you seem to think every priest is guilty of not adhering to the rule of celibacy but that can't be true.

dont mind him, let him go and take statistics of married men vs priest who have sex outside marriage or break vow and he will find out that most married men do it dan most priests

Let’s face it, Pope Francis
thinks outside the box. This
is very evident in the long
interview by Antonio
Spadaro, SJ which has just
been published in major
Jesuit journals around the
world, including the English translation in
America magazine. The Holy Father’s
remarks are at once insightful, fascinating
and challenging. And most of them are
outside the box.
By this I mean that Francis is able to unify
the best insights of what we might call the
conservative and the liberal Catholic into a
single vision which draws all of us into a
mission of Christian service to the world, a
merciful service of truth and goodness to
those struggling in the dark. Thus when I
read the interview from my background as
a self-described “orthodox Catholic
intellectual”, I naturally found the Pope’s
reflections somewhat challenging. They
invited me to set aside some preconceived
notions, or at least to minimize certain
tendencies, and to integrate my preference
for a well-ordered analysis of the Gospel
into a more missionary sympathy for those
burdened by the messiness and confusion so
characteristic of our time.
But at the same time I recognized that
someone reading the interview from a more
“liberal” or “progressive” point of view
would find himself similarly challenged to
set aside preconceptions, or at least to
minimize certain tendencies, in order to
seek to engage that messiness and confusion
from the heart of the Church where it can
be healed.
To put it another way, Pope Francis has a
way of challenging the “conservative”
Catholic to be more open to the mission of
mercy and the “progressive” Catholic to be
more open to the mission of mercy. A
mission of mercy implies a deep willingness
to share in the struggles of another, from
which the “conservative” personality often
recoils; and it also implies a deep
willingness to resolve those struggles
specifically in Christ, from which the
“liberal” personality often recoils.
Or to try to express it one more time, both
faith without mission and mission without
faith are pointless.
Now all of these modes of expression
oversimplify to some extent, for each one of
us possesses the various human tendencies
in greater or lesser degrees. What I am
getting at is difficult to express without
misunderstanding. But I believe that Pope
Francis, in thinking so often outside the
Church’s internal polemical box, has a way
of challenging all of us to break out of our
own personal categories in order to
immerse ourselves more fully in the
fundamental character of the Church as
mission.
Inviting All of Us to Go Deeper
If this is so, then cherry picking individual
quotes to “prove” this or that about the
pope’s own “prejudices” is especially unfair
and unfruitful. Very often we will be
startled with the way he expresses
something only to realize, on reflection,
that we are being called to go deeper based
on the totality of what he has tried to
express. Accustomed as we are to what we
might call the culture wars within the
Church, we often allow particular words
and phrases to serve as red flags
which predetermine our reaction. This is a
grave mistake, because Pope Francis simply
does not think quite like the rest of us, and
he certainly does not express himself like
the rest of us.
He doesn’t seem to know the partisan
shorthand; he refuses to speak in the secret
code.
This presents us with an incomparable
chance to deepen both our faith and our life
in Christ in new and surprising ways. But I
also wonder whether the decision of the
Holy Spirit to bring this particular pope to
the helm at this particular time means that
a sufficient groundwork has been laid by
popes John Paul II and Benedict XVI to
enable the greater part of the Church once
again to come together as a unified
community.
My readers know that I think the renewal
called for by the Second Vatican Council is
finally underway, and that the pace of that
renewal in dioceses and parishes is
increasing by the day. They also know that I
see the mainstream Catholic universities
and some mainline religious communities,
especially among women in the United
States, as major holdouts. But if the thirst
for authentic renewal has at least reached
critical mass (as I strongly suspect it has),
then we will soon have people on all sides
moving toward a deeper sense of Catholic
mission. Pope Francis may be just the man
to serve as a rallying point.
This is at least devoutly to be hoped. And it
makes me curious. I am tempted to identify
one favorite quote from this interview, not
as an exercise in self-serving cherry-
picking, but simply to say: “I loved this one
because it challenged me to go deeper into
what it means to be a Catholic.” Among
several possibilities, I at first selected two.
But I don’t want to cheat, so I’ll mention
only one and let others fill in. Here is my
one:
I have a dogmatic certainty: God is in every
person’s life. God is in everyone’s life. Even
if the life of a person has been a disaster,
even if it is destroyed by vices, drugs or
anything else—God is in this person’s life.
You can, you must try to seek God in every
human life. Although the life of a person is
a land full of thorns and weeds, there is
always a space in which the good seed can
grow. You have to trust God.
www.catholicculture.org

Ray McBlue: No matter what you do, you are incapable of hoodwinking nature. Nature dictates that MAN MUST HAVE SEX, and anybody that tries to go contrary to the formula by pretending celibacy is only deceiving himself.

hope ur a human being

Sal C: Stealing is a sin according to the scriptures yet many christians steal in one way or the other. Should we scrap off the commandment "thou shall not steal" because it is difficult for some people to keep?

Personally it doesn't make much difference to me weather celibacy is scraped off or retained but few people not being able to maintain a standard shouldn't be the reason why such standard should be compromised or such rules scrapped off.

nice one

Sal C: Stealing is a sin according to the scriptures yet many christians steal in one way or the other. Should we scrap off the commandment "thou shall not steal" because it is difficult for some people to keep?

Personally it doesn't make much difference to me weather celibacy is scraped off or retained but few people not being able to maintain a standard shouldn't be the reason why such standard should be compromised or such rules scrapped off.

exactly whats on my mind. thanks

alexleo: My friend, @italo, once told me here (and even bragged about it) that catholic church is a perfect church that cannot change their practices /traditions/doctrine which they have been doing for over 2000 years now. Here is Pope Francis making various changes since he assumed office. I wonder what happened to the perfectness that my friend claimed about his church. He condemns our churches for changing some of our traditions and each time we try to make him understand that these changes must always come as we keep growing in the knowledge of the word of God, he always tells us that catholic church is perfect and can never change any of their traditions. Today, Pope has proved him wrong serially with the series of changes he has brought into catholic.

did he realy change the teachings of the church? or is he saying that the manner or d tone these things are being taught should change so that d d moral teachings of the church does not fall like a park of cards? in oda words so dat people does not run away from d church due to strictness and insistence on these rules rather dan drawing them to closer to God with love first before applying d rules.

Mescopaul: We know that stems up from unholiness, females immoral dressing, lust and so on, but for Rev Fathers, its to satisfy their craving for what God has ordained from the foundation of the world. Sin is in the world, so those married pastors that lust after othe women is just part of the sin and fall of man. But in the other case of the Rev Fathers we would not address it as "he has fallen into sin" because it was something that was delibrately carried out as a result of misconception of the bible.

so u think dis makes sense ?
if u were God, who will u punish more? is it d pastors dat have to themselvs all d beautifull women to marry and stil lust at oda women outside or the priests that have non but decide to do it because of lust?
rememba, d two of them did it due to lust of the flesh

Sal C: I haven't been seeing around lately hope you are fine.
And thanks for the response.

my guy am fine just dat i only post when i c comments dat irritate me so much. apart from dat, i just read and laugh

i know most penticostals will like this especially those of them that hate the catholic church, but i must tell u that its not going to work in ur own way. and for ur info, anybody who wants to serve as a clergy in d cathlic church and be married at d same time will not be a priest but can only be a deacon( yes we have permanent deacons and they are married) there are many of them in the US and i also know a nigerian who is a permanent deacon. if that is not enof, u can become a priest in d eastern othodox catholic church and if that is not still enof, u can join the anglican use either in d uk,us australia or germany( dats if ur alredy serving as a priest in d anglican church)
so anybody thinking that d catholic church of Rome will change their rule on celibacy for priests is just a dreamer. many married men have extra marital affairs so celibacy is not d reason y priests break their vow of celibacy but lack of discipline.

naijadeyhia: You do not honour mary you venerate her and if you check your dictionary the word venerate also means to worship

are u ignorant or blind? go to ur dictionary again or use wikipedia.
To venerate simply means to show great respect.

Mescopaul: But it seems that it doesnt favor them, cos we've heard so many stories, it would have been better if they had taken Paul's advice.

we have also heard stories about some maried pastors who lost after their female members and even males and children. so in this case, are u suggesting that their churches were wrong for sticking to one man one wife or should they also provide them with male wives?

He
who
speaks
ill
of
his
neighbor
is
a
hypocrite
who
lacks the courage to look to his own
shortcomings. Speaking during his homily at
morning Mass at the Domus Sanctae Marthae,
Pope Francis focused on the fact that gossip
has a “criminal” side to it, because every time
we speak ill of our brothers, we imitate Caine’s
homicidal gesture.
The seed of Pope Francis’ homily on Friday was
Jesus’s thought provoking query when he
asked: “Why do you look at the speck of
sawdust in your brother’s eye and pay no
attention to the plank in your own eye?” After
having spoken about humility – he said – Jesus
speaks to us of its opposite: “of that hateful
attitude towards one’s neighbor when one
becomes a “judge” of his brother”. In this
context – the Pope points out – Jesus uses a
strong word: “hypocrite”.
“Those who live judging their neighbor,
speaking ill of their neighbor, are hypocrites,
because they lack the strength and the courage
to look to their own shortcomings. The Lord
does not waste many words on this concept.
Further on he says that he who has hatred in
his heart for his brother is a murderer. In his
first letter, John the Apostle also says it
clearly: anyone who has hatred for his brother
is a murderer, he walks in darkness, he who
judges his brother walks in darkness”.
And so – Pope Francis continued – every time
we judge our brothers in our hearts – or worse
still when we speak ill of them with others, we
are Christian murderers:
“A Christian murderer…. It’s not me saying
this, it’s the Lord. And there is no place for
nuances. If you speak ill of your brother, you
kill your brother. And every time we do this,
we are imitating that gesture of Caine, the first
murderer in History”:
And the Pope added that in this time in history
when there is much talk of war and so many
pleas for peace, “a gesture of conversion on
our own behalf is necessary”. “Gossip – he
warned – always has a criminal side to it.
There is no such thing as innocent gossip”. And
quoting St. James the Apostle, the Pope said
the tongue is to be used to praise God, “but
when we use our tongue to speak ill of our
brother or sister, we are using it to kill God”,
“the image of God in our brother”. Some may
say – the Pope commented – that there are
persons who deserve being gossiped about. But
it is not so:
“Go and pray for him! Go and do penance for
her! And then, if it is necessary, speak to that
person who may be able to seek remedy for
the problem. But don’t tell everyone! Paul had
been a sinner, and he says of himself: I was
once a blasphemer, a persecutor, a violent
man. But I have been mercifully treated”.
Perhaps none of us are blasphemer –
perhaps… But if we ever gossip we are
certainly persecutors and violent. We ask for
grace so that we and the entire Church may
convert from the crime of gossip to love, to
humility, to meekness, to docility, to the
generosity of love towards our neighbor”.
www.news.va

ayoku777: I've read the book of Enoch and the Book of Jasher and I think I get what FOLYKAZE is trying to say. If biblical books that are inspired by the Holy Spirit used this other books as references, shouldn't that mean those books too are authentic? Unless you're saying the Holy Spirit is using heresis to reference scripture, coz the book of Joshua referred to the book of Jasher and Jude referred to Enoch.

There was also this account in Jude 1:9 where Micheal fought with the Devil over the body of Moses. We don't have this story in any of our 66 books today. I think its obvious that what the generation of the apostles called scripture was bulkier than our own bible today. And while we are free to keep an open mind like I do when I read this other books, we need maturity to balance truth

pls dont be deceivd go and read my earlier post. the septuagint was what d apostles used as their old testament and dis book of enoch was not there, so it is proper dat d church does not deviate so they cant add it to d bible. and again, dat a book is not in d bible does not make it bad but dat d Holy Spirit who is d author of d bible does not deem it fit to be consumed whollely as revealed truth. in oda words, some ofthe tins in d book of enoch and d rest are true just like there are truths in rumoure. so wot st.jude did was to qoute dat passage he believed to b true as revealed to him by jesus. and for ur info, an author must not agree with everytin in a book even if he quoted some part of it to support his book

ayoku777: I've read the book of Enoch and the Book of Jasher and I think I get what FOLYKAZE is trying to say. If biblical books that are inspired by the Holy Spirit used this other books as references, shouldn't that mean those books too are authentic? Unless you're saying the Holy Spirit is using heresis to reference scripture, coz the book of Joshua referred to the book of Jasher and Jude referred to Enoch.

There was also this account in Jude 1:9 where Micheal fought with the Devil over the body of Moses. We don't have this story in any of our 66 books today. I think its obvious that what the generation of the apostles called scripture was bulkier than our own bible today. And while we are free to keep an open mind like I do when I read this other books, we need maturity to balance truth

pls go and read my earlier post.
d fact dat a book is not found in d bible does not mean its bad. in otherwords, d books of the bible are inspired dat does not mean dat d holy spirit does not inspire anyoda book today. there are many books considered as scripture but d books canonized by d authority of d only church is bible and dat is to say dat they are d ones God wants and feels dat his children will read everytin in dem and they will profit from every truth in it. dat is also to say dat there are elements of truth in all d books not canonized but not everyrin is true in dem. dat is y st. jude quoted from it.

Enigma: The Roman Catholic Church did not canonise anything at the African regional Synods/Councils of Hippo and Carthage.

Even before the Synod of Hippo, Athanasius of Alexandria who was not a Roman Catholic had in AD 367 identified the canon "handed down".

The Roman Catholic Church did not finalise its own canon until as late as the 16th century at the Council of Trent.

abeg, wot is dis clown saying, smh.
i have seen ur many posts here on nairaland where u spew dis rubbish repitedly in ur attempt to discredit d catholic church.u mentiond st. athanasius who was canonised by d catholic church as non catholic? may be u will expect d pope to canonize kumuyi or oyedepo,lol. d catholic church says dat they concluded on d canon around 300yrs after christ and ur saying otherwise so who is rite? athanasius is not d pope so he is not a voice to speak for the whole church

Reyginus: Let me cut it out now. In the life of the apostles there were evidence of the presence of the holy spirit. They were never habitual sinners and when they fall short of the glory of God, they take time out to ask for forgiveness and correct immediately whatever led to the poisoning of their character.
They never stretched the grace of God in their lifes to an extent the spirit of God had to depart from them.
Now, take the popes above and make an unbiased comparism.

ur only assuming dat d holy spirit left dos popes because they sinned but u never assumed d spirit left d apostles who sinned as well. d article didnt say they never repented and even if they didnt, d church is d church of God not d popes, so He will continue to protect it from false teachings even when his popes are down. lastly d article never mentioned dat dose popes taught anything against God

Enigma: A few points:

1. Let us just say that the history of papacy is erm "very interesting": surprising that this detail is lost on some people ignorantly shouting "apostolic succession".

2. The impression often given by some Roman Catholics is that the "pope" is "infallible" and seemingly on all matters of doctrine when in fact Roman Catholic documents and teaching indicate that even the "pope" is actually fallible on matters of doctrine.

3. For hundreds of years the head of the Roman Catholic Church was not even called or titled "pope"!

4. It was in fact the Eastern Orthodox people who first came up with the title "pope" and they were calling their patriarchs "pope" before the Roman Catholics first borrowed it and then took it over - at least most prominently.

5. The title "pope" is no better than "Daddy G.O.", "Papa" etc; in fact "pope" really means "papa".

cant u c dat ur confused? i have bin reading about ur hatred on d catholic church but all u have bin saying hold no water. if i am u i will keep quiet and listen to others comment. jmoi have said it all, dat d pope is fallible like any other man xcept in matters of doctrine and dat is undastandable to anybody because of d promises if jesus to his church

bizmahn: My own bible & the churches I repect teach clearly that homo'sexuality is outright ABOMINABLE SIN cos its never inborn but acquired by environmental influence.Even if it be inborn its sin.FULL STOP.

do u even use ur brain or u just take in everytin said by ur pastor? so even when am.born with an abnormality( which is nt my fault) am a sinner. in oda words God created dem to be naturally sinners?

there where many books written those days and all can not definitely enter into d bible. though i dont know d criteria for choosing d books butvi think chukwudi got it correctly when he said that d book of enoch was not in the septuagint so d catholic church canonized only the septuagint and then added d new testament books.
NB: that a book is not in the bible does not mean its not good or even inspired so just like every author, st.jude quoted d part he thought and was convinced to be true and that does not mean that everything said by the book of enoch was true. so the book of jude was inspired even if he quoted enoch. enoch may be inspired but its inpiration may not be for d edification of all. like i said b4, i dont know d criteria for chosing d books but dat what might have happened

hod898: What can I say if it's God that asked him to step down? He did the right thing to obey God's instruction, but I didn't know that serving God has tenure; I only know that we serve God even to the end, like Jesus said, "but whoever holds on to the very end shall be saved." matt10:22
And besides op, this post is as if the author was trying to make it long-- too many irrelevant repetitions.

i thought i was d only person who noticed d problem with the writup.


but i have problem with ur other points.
that he steped down from the papacy does not mean he is not going to do Gods work again. lets say that God have assigned him another work ie to remain in solitary like a monk. ur aware that same thing has happened to a pope b4 who resigned and went back to the monastery

Ishilove: Chei!! See finishing!!

i guess ur in support of that clown who could not reply to a post but chose to behave like a child

Enigma: Sorry to be rude but when you grow up and can write better, try again and maybe I will reply.

my son, when u grow up.and dont know how to reply to a post then keep ur mouth shut.

this news is misleading. its as if d reporter is speaking with two mouths at d same time. so tell me: did he say that he resigned because of the mystical experience he had or because of the corruption in d vatican?

Enigma: A "Christian" is a Christian.

A Christian does not need denominations and abominations like "Roman Catholic Church", "Power Must Change Hands Ministry" etc etc.

There is ONLY ONE Church --- and that is the Christian Church!

Nevertheless, given the weaknesses of humans that led us to denominations and abominations, Christians can still fellowship together --- even if they belong to different denominations.

Christians can admit other Christians to "Holy Communion" --- even if they belong to different denominations.

Finally: it is a huge mistake and even quite un-Christian and un-Christlike to ask Christians to identify themselves by denominations. Strictly speaking Christians should only be identified or identify themselves as ------ Christians!

my brother, u dont have a point at all. if thats it, den y do u call catholics, winners etc. when u want to talk about things u believe catholics are wrong at, u wil often say "catholics blieve in images, mary" etc ,y snot say" xtians blieve in images mary etc.
its clear that u guys are ashamed to name ur church because u dont know where u stand so ur not sure of ur church because in d first place its not even supposed to be called a church. u bliev dat jesus founded only one church but cannot identify it but we the catholics know that we are in that church founded by jesus dats y we are not ashamed to talk about it.

dr dams: U guys r d reason y islam wud always say we r divided.
Nw God bless catholics nt christian?
Some of u even say ur religion is Catholicism.

are u jealous?

[quote author=Syncan]So those condeming the Pope wants "Disrespect between christians and moslems"? Hey na wa o, see as hatred de put people for bondage. Only the truth shall set you free.[/quote
abeg help me, i dont undastand this people