Is Australia a good place for a Catholic?
#51
(11-19-2010, 12:37 AM)LaramieHirsch Wrote: Scipio,...your remarks throught the forum.


My words throught the forum...I bet they do...LOL


Probably past tense of thwart in middle English or something...
Reply
#52
"I agree to this Constitution with all its faults, if they are such; because I think a general Government necessary for us, and there is no form of Government but what may be a blessing to the people if well administered, and believe farther that this is likely to be well administered for a course of years, and can only end in Despotism, as other forms have done before it, when the people shall become so corrupted as to need despotic Government, being incapable of any other."

-Benjamin Franklin, Final Speech at the Constitutional Convention, 9-17-1787
Reply
#53
From Pope Benedict XVI's Papal Letter on the Society of St Pius X, March 12, 2009

"The excommunication affects individuals, not institutions. An episcopal ordination lacking a pontifical mandate raises the danger of a schism, since it jeopardizes the unity of the College of Bishops with the Pope. Consequently the Church must react by employing her most severe punishment -- excommunication -- with the aim of calling those thus punished to repent and to return to unity. Twenty years after the ordinations, this goal has sadly not yet been attained. The remission of the excommunication has the same aim as that of the punishment: namely, to invite the four Bishops once more to return. This gesture was possible once the interested parties had expressed their recognition in principle of the Pope and his authority as Pastor, albeit with some reservations in the area of obedience to his doctrinal authority and to the authority of the Council. Here I return to the distinction between individuals and institutions. The remission of the excommunication was a measure taken in the field of ecclesiastical discipline: the individuals were freed from the burden of conscience constituted by the most serious of ecclesiastical penalties. This disciplinary level needs to be distinguished from the doctrinal level. The fact that the Society of Saint Pius X does not possess a canonical status in the Church is not, in the end, based on disciplinary but on doctrinal reasons. As long as the Society does not have a canonical status in the Church, its ministers do not exercise legitimate ministries in the Church. There needs to be a distinction, then, between the disciplinary level, which deals with individuals as such, and the doctrinal level, at which ministry and institution are involved. In order to make this clear once again: until the doctrinal questions are clarified, the Society has no canonical status in the Church, and its ministers -- even though they have been freed of the ecclesiastical penalty -- do not legitimately exercise any ministry in the Church."

Scipio, don't tell me that I avoid the SSPX because I'm afraid of my parents 'going nuts on me' or being called anything by the local ordinary. My parents are lapsed Catholics who don't support the church at all, and I don't give a shit about what any locals have to say about me. The POPE HIMSELF has stated explicitly that the SSPX do not have canonical status in the Church and that it's ministers do not legitimately excercise any ministry in the Church. I obey the POPE, because I am a Roman Catholic.Are you missing something here? Are you loyal to the Pope and the Holy Church, or to your own aesthetic preferences and your fundamentalist prejudices? Don't give me any moronic shit about me using 'false logic' to justify my avoidance of the SSPX.

The Eastern Orthodox are in doctrinal dialogue with Rome as well, and their excommunications have also been dropped. That doesn't mean I can start attending and receiving communion in Eastern Orthodox churches.
Reply
#54
(11-19-2010, 02:19 AM)Raskolnikov Wrote: From Pope Benedict XVI's Papal Letter on the Society of St Pius X, March 12, 2009

"The excommunication affects individuals, not institutions. An episcopal ordination lacking a pontifical mandate raises the danger of a schism, since it jeopardizes the unity of the College of Bishops with the Pope. Consequently the Church must react by employing her most severe punishment -- excommunication -- with the aim of calling those thus punished to repent and to return to unity. Twenty years after the ordinations, this goal has sadly not yet been attained. The remission of the excommunication has the same aim as that of the punishment: namely, to invite the four Bishops once more to return. This gesture was possible once the interested parties had expressed their recognition in principle of the Pope and his authority as Pastor, albeit with some reservations in the area of obedience to his doctrinal authority and to the authority of the Council. Here I return to the distinction between individuals and institutions. The remission of the excommunication was a measure taken in the field of ecclesiastical discipline: the individuals were freed from the burden of conscience constituted by the most serious of ecclesiastical penalties. This disciplinary level needs to be distinguished from the doctrinal level. The fact that the Society of Saint Pius X does not possess a canonical status in the Church is not, in the end, based on disciplinary but on doctrinal reasons. As long as the Society does not have a canonical status in the Church, its ministers do not exercise legitimate ministries in the Church. There needs to be a distinction, then, between the disciplinary level, which deals with individuals as such, and the doctrinal level, at which ministry and institution are involved. In order to make this clear once again: until the doctrinal questions are clarified, the Society has no canonical status in the Church, and its ministers -- even though they have been freed of the ecclesiastical penalty -- do not legitimately exercise any ministry in the Church."

Scipio, don't tell me that I avoid the SSPX because I'm afraid of my parents 'going nuts on me' or being called anything by the local ordinary. My parents are lapsed Catholics who don't support the church at all, and I don't give a shit about what any locals have to say about me. The POPE HIMSELF has stated explicitly that the SSPX do not have canonical status in the Church and that it's ministers do not legitimately excercise any ministry in the Church. I obey the POPE, because I am a Roman Catholic.Are you missing something here? Are you loyal to the Pope and the Holy Church, or to your own aesthetic preferences and your fundamentalist prejudices? Don't give me any moronic shit about me using 'false logic' to justify my avoidance of the SSPX.

The Eastern Orthodox are in doctrinal dialogue with Rome as well, and their excommunications have also been dropped. That doesn't mean I can start attending and receiving communion in Eastern Orthodox churches.

The SSPX is not in the same situation as the eastern orthodox. The latter are schismatics. The SSPX (as such) is not. I think the issue mistake people make at times is reducing things to 'schism or 'no-schism'. Because even in the no-schism category, it says nothing about whether the priests in question are suspended or not (and that is a very important issue in all reputable theological standards).

Reply
#55
(11-19-2010, 02:19 AM)Raskolnikov Wrote: From Pope Benedict XVI's Papal Letter on the Society of St Pius X, March 12, 2009

"The excommunication affects individuals, not institutions. An episcopal ordination lacking a pontifical mandate raises the danger of a schism, since it jeopardizes the unity of the College of Bishops with the Pope. Consequently the Church must react by employing her most severe punishment -- excommunication -- with the aim of calling those thus punished to repent and to return to unity. Twenty years after the ordinations, this goal has sadly not yet been attained. The remission of the excommunication has the same aim as that of the punishment: namely, to invite the four Bishops once more to return. This gesture was possible once the interested parties had expressed their recognition in principle of the Pope and his authority as Pastor, albeit with some reservations in the area of obedience to his doctrinal authority and to the authority of the Council. Here I return to the distinction between individuals and institutions. The remission of the excommunication was a measure taken in the field of ecclesiastical discipline: the individuals were freed from the burden of conscience constituted by the most serious of ecclesiastical penalties. This disciplinary level needs to be distinguished from the doctrinal level. The fact that the Society of Saint Pius X does not possess a canonical status in the Church is not, in the end, based on disciplinary but on doctrinal reasons. As long as the Society does not have a canonical status in the Church, its ministers do not exercise legitimate ministries in the Church. There needs to be a distinction, then, between the disciplinary level, which deals with individuals as such, and the doctrinal level, at which ministry and institution are involved. In order to make this clear once again: until the doctrinal questions are clarified, the Society has no canonical status in the Church, and its ministers -- even though they have been freed of the ecclesiastical penalty -- do not legitimately exercise any ministry in the Church."

Scipio, don't tell me that I avoid the SSPX because I'm afraid of my parents 'going nuts on me' or being called anything by the local ordinary. My parents are lapsed Catholics who don't support the church at all, and I don't give a shit about what any locals have to say about me. The POPE HIMSELF has stated explicitly that the SSPX do not have canonical status in the Church and that it's ministers do not legitimately excercise any ministry in the Church. I obey the POPE, because I am a Roman Catholic.Are you missing something here? Are you loyal to the Pope and the Holy Church, or to your own aesthetic preferences and your fundamentalist prejudices? Don't give me any moronic shit about me using 'false logic' to justify my avoidance of the SSPX.

The Eastern Orthodox are in doctrinal dialogue with Rome as well, and their excommunications have also been dropped. That doesn't mean I can start attending and receiving communion in Eastern Orthodox churches.

I see only the phrase "danger of schism," which means they're not in schism, but only in danger of it.

At any rate, actions speak louder than words. Have a look at this amazing article:

http://www.remnantnewspaper.com/Archives...fellay.htm



Reply
#56
(11-19-2010, 12:37 AM)LaramieHirsch Wrote:
(11-19-2010, 12:03 AM)Scipio_a Wrote: Run away...please...please please...run away....you'll be happy in Cambodia.


Amerika...land of unfreedom...sick demented feminist culture....run away  ...


We should pay for the dude to go and let in 10,000 more Mexicans....10,000 eager folks for Laramie...that's a good deal

Scipio, I'm sorry you were born with male genitals.  But you just have to learn to live with what God gave you, ma'am. 

By the way, I love how your words read like you're a smirking prude (or an obnoxious 15-year old...or an overweight hairy gay English professor) in your remarks throught the forum.  It's refreshing to read the words that I'm sure Christ would say in conversation.  Indeed, you are the pinnacle of true humility.

Hey Laramie,

I say you take him up on his generous offer, but he probably won't pay more than the loose change he found changing bedpans.  But, hypothetically speaking, if he had some real scratch to throw around, it might be worth it.  I suspect Skippy has a major Napoleon complex (sometimes called the little man's syndrome).  So, his ultimate goal is to organise those 10,000 Mexicans and use them in concert with all the other Mexicans to take over Texas and have himself installed as the new king. 

All hail King Skippy !!!
        [Image: kingskippy.jpg]
Reply
#57
(11-19-2010, 01:34 AM)Scipio_a Wrote:
(11-19-2010, 12:37 AM)LaramieHirsch Wrote: Scipio,...your remarks throught the forum.


My words throught the forum...I bet they do...LOL


Probably past tense of thwart in middle English or something...

Awe darlin'!  Cute as a button!  Yer gettin' all testy!  I'll leave the previous typo up on the thread, just for you!  Stay close, and you and me'll cuddle up later, hun!

(11-19-2010, 01:29 AM)dymphna17 Wrote: yeah, you're a paragon of virtue there yourself.  I suggest you look to the beam in your own eye before you start laying out humility lessons for Scipio.

Now now!  If you act like a Pharisee, I'll speak to you like one.  And about feminism, I attack it.  If that upsets you, start a different thread about it.  I think it appropriate to be strident against women's lib since it's been shoved down my throat all my life. 

- - -


Moving on, I asked about Australia for a couple of reasons. 

First, as a recepient of the National Inflation Association newsletters, I've checked their website for their views on other countries.  You can find lots of information and predictions about the coming hyperinflation in the US at this website (here's a link to a good Q/A section http://inflation.us/nianswers/)They've stated the following about Australia:

-NIA is very bullish about Australia's economy and we
strongly believe it will boom while the U.S. experiences
hyperinflation. Australia will mainly thrive due to their
production of gold and silver, but the country also has many
other valuable resources like coal, natural gas, base
metals, and agricultural commodities. Australia already has
a trade surplus due and a very low unemployment rate of just
5.1%. More than half of Australia's exports go to China,
Japan, South Korea, and India, with less than 5% of their
exports going to the U.S.

-We believe Australia's central bank has been one of the most
responsible out of all major nations, as they were the first
to raise interest rates. Australia's interest rates are
currently 4.5% compared to the Federal Reserve's interest
rates of 0% to 0.25%.

Last week, Australia held interest rates the same, which
surprised many who felt they would continue raising them.
With economic data being released from Australia in recent
days being very strong, we are sure their central bank will
continue to raise rates in the near future.

Australia's currency is one that we believe will remain very
strong for years to come. It will decline in purchasing
power in terms of gold and silver, but hold up a lot better
than the U.S. dollar, in our opinion.

- Q  Are you aware of any US residents moving out of the USA to live abroad until the US economy improves/recovers, and if so, what countries are best suited to weather USA's economic troubles? 
 
A  We are not encouraging any NIA members to leave the U.S. but
we are certainly hearing from many NIA members who are
making plans to move abroad for the upcoming
hyperinflationary crisis. If you only speak English then
Australia and New Zealand are our top choices. Canada is
also worth considering if you want to stay close.


Another reason that Australia is now interesting me is because there's a shortage of radiography technologists, which is what I do.  I hear that the pay and benefits can be quite nice, let alone the change in scenery. 

Concerning the Catholic Church, the other day, when I went to the website for the Catholic Church in Australia http://www.catholic.org.au/, I saw what looked like new age-styled sanctuaries, and several quotations came up on the screen stating the following:

- "The Church hears the cries of the poor and the groans of the earth.  It seeks to stand in solidarity with the poor and the marginalised, and to exercise good stewardship of the fragile ecosystems that support life on earth."  A New EArth.  The Environmental Challenge, ACBC Social Justice Statement, 2002   
- "The Body of Christ presumes a place for everyone.  The Gospel of Jesus Christ demands a place for everyone." We Have a Story
-  "I want to tell you right away how much the Church esteems and loves you, and how much she wishes to assist you in your spiritual and material needs.  Pope John Paul II, address to Indigenous Gathering, Alice Springs, 1986


These things on this website come off as fishy to me.  Which is why I'm asking about the Catholic Church in Australia. 



Reply
#58
5o beat you to the man crush thing, Laramie

as for your non sequitur response to Dymphna....lol..I don't think she mentioned feminism....


Go to Australia.....or Cambodia..or Canada...lol
Reply
#59
(11-19-2010, 02:57 AM)Scipio_a Wrote: 5o beat you to the man crush thing, Laramie

as for your non sequitur response to Dymphna....lol..I don't think she mentioned feminism....


Go to Australia.....or Cambodia..or Canada...lol



Scram fly.  Grownups are talkin'.

(11-19-2010, 02:45 AM)Hawaii Five-0 Wrote: I suspect Skippy has a major Napoleon complex (sometimes called the little man's syndrome). 

It makes sense to me.  I have a coworker in another radiology modality who's also rather stout.  He always walks around with his shoulders puffed up and his chin high.  Hilarious display, really.  He's loud, arrogant, and snotty.  And he always takes the contrary position to people.  And if he's losing in a battle of rationality, he defers to the John Stewart/Saul Alinsky approach to mocking whoever he deems is a threat. 

No one ever takes him seriously.  Just a fun little punching bag for people to practice on.  I guess that's Scipio's role here, too. 
Reply
#60
(11-19-2010, 03:15 AM)LaramieHirsch Wrote: Scram fly.  Grownups are talkin'.

Oh, I got it...you and 5 o want some alone time....be sure to close the door and turn up the radio...


[Image: APILLAR4BRICK.gif]

Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)