General Chat

Cynthia, I have no problem following your comments.

I started this by asking if Catholic Priests should be allowed to marry and I feel I have been beamed back 34 years to my time working at Iona Abbey and listening to all the theologians various discussions :-S

Beam be back Scotty ;-)

you're the one who went off topic John

In Knock, Co Mayo, Ireland, Fr Michael Keane was known countrywide as the founder of the Knock Marriage Bureau which first saw the light of day over 40 years ago.

I'll have a word with my own priest tomorrow after Mass to see if he would like to engage the bureau or, perhaps, set up one locally for the benefit of himself & his colleagues.

Merlin. If the Jehovah's Witnesses are to be believed, only 144,000 in all centuries will attain heaven.

So there will be a run on stoking shovels. Think I will need one. Do you know some good, cheap suppliers?

Somewhere in Bible it says it will be a countless number (and I reckon I could just about count 144,000) so think we both still have a chance. :-)

I am just a bit worried that we are rather straying from the OP about RC priests being allowed to marry. If that ever was accepted by the Pope, how would he react to a same sex marriage?

Original sin stems from something that King David said. We are all born in sin, and shapen in crookedness.

Now, I have hardly ever met anyone who denies we grow up and move away from good (or God) until there is a major intervention in our lives. But there is virtually no acceptance that babies are born sinful. Even in churches where we recite "born in sin" so often, there is a general disbelief.

It is often expressed something like "my baby died at 3 weeks old. She was the sweetest baby imaginable and you are telling me she was born in sin". Never an easy one. Raises the thorny question of infant baptism, but not a subject for this thread, I am sure.

I have just looked in my Thesaurus for definition in simple terms. Original sin - a sin said to be inherited by all descendants of Adam; "Adam and Eve committed the original sin when they ate the forbidden fruit in the Garden of Eden" an act that is regarded by theologians as a transgression of God's will............. :-S

Oh dear Rose,after reading all this I think when I pop My Clogs I,ll have to take a "Stoking Shovel "With me. Oh woe is me. :-(

39 buttons on a priests cassock - I'm learning something everyday. I don't think I need to go to church anymore. I think I will just log on to this site.

GP

"Original sin suggests we are born selfish and will follow our passions unless restrained. Restrained by parents, friends, children sometimes. And restrained by God if we believe in Him. I think that is one teaching that almost all Protestants and Catholics can agree about."

One thing you can say for John, is that he pushes one to clarify ones own opinions on matters . I don't agree with the above, I have 'read up' briefly the various church's stance on 'original sin' and it seems the more doctrine I read the further I get from 'organised religion'.

obvously my church teaches original sin but not in the way you have described it - poetic license springs to mind

Got to go out soon but have been googling around for a more up-to-date explanation ....the original is very 'thee, thou, yea, nay' language.

This may help.


We usually shrug off our shortcomings by saying, “I’m only human” – but that is only an explanation, not an excuse.

The 39 Articles declare that people are “predisposed to evil”. That may sound like an exaggeration, but who of us can deny that we do things every day which fall short of even our own standards?

Somerset Maugham once said, “If I wrote down every thought I have ever thought and every deed I have ever done, men would call me a monster of depravity.”

The Bible urges us to compare ourselves with God’s standards; only then do we see how far short we have fallen, and how much we need a saviour.


:-)

Oh, you're back John. :-D


I was just going to suggest that Ann had a word with her Rector about the 39 Articles (which he agreed to uphold at his ordination) and the concept of Original Sin. :-D


This is from the Church of England website....

***********
Of the Church of England

The Church of England, established according to the laws of this realm under the Queen's Majesty, belongs to the true and apostolic Church of Christ; and, as our duty to the said Church of England requires, we do constitute and ordain that no member thereof shall be at liberty to maintain or hold the contrary.

Of the Thirty-nine Articles of Religion

The Thirty-nine Articles are agreeable to the Word of God and may be assented unto with a good conscience by all members of the Church of England.

*****************


Original Sin comes in at No. 9 of the 39.


Did you know that there are 39 buttons on a priest's cassock.....as a reminder of the Articles when they are fastened. It's a bit 'old hat' now, but interesting just the same. :-)

Thanks, will take "flowered it up" as a compliment, I think.
Hate to say this. But you have ignored my question, Ann. What does your church believe about teaching of original sin?

flowered it up - indeed you did - and by the way, not all of us were rebellious teenagers - at the time I was a teenager we did as we were told - you rebelled at your peril

Awfully sorry I have to keep going out. Must take my laptop to the shops and tell my wife to hurry along whilst I answer posts.

Yes, Ann. I was pussyfooting round the doctrine of original sin.

Is it not accepted teaching in your particular church, then? It is one of the fundamental precepts of mine. I perhaps flowered it up a bit for effect, but most of us notice it particularly in rebellious teenagers. And most of us were one of those once, I suspect.

Original sin suggests we are born selfish and will follow our passions unless restrained. Restrained by parents, friends, children sometimes. And restrained by God if we believe in Him. I think that is one teaching that almost all Protestants and Catholics can agree about.

I am not goading him Cynthia - don't keep saying that - he has made a statement and I and two others on here vehemently disagree with it - how is that goading when we ask him to explain himself - and he is quite able to speak for himslf - why do you insist on doing it for him - he's a grown up

Ann - it looks as though you are goading John to return just so that you can argue with him. :-(

well my knowledge and personal experience completely refutes his sweeping statement

Paula,
most of it gained from the Cyber Bible "Wikipedia" plus a little help from the "Christian" Bible.
Unfortunately both products of the human race, so both equally flawed.
:-D :-D