Welcome to Blogster!
1,488,168 Blogster Users  |  364,642 Posts
 
 
 

tjdonegan

 

Blog Traffic: 9964

Posts: 172

My Comments: 642

User Comments: 924

Photos: 3

Friends: 6

Following: 0

Followers: 4

Points: 3287

Last Online: 18 hours ago


 
 

Visitors

No Recent Visitors
 

The future of the Roman Catholic Church

Added: Sunday, August 4th 2019 at 2:15pm by tjdonegan
 
 
 

On occasion one encounters current, and/or former Catholics disappointed by the Church’s neglect of Traditional teaching, those remaining with the Church because the Church possesses - and communicates - the Sacraments…

For several generations the Roman Catholic Church has largely neglected the culture; what criticism it has leveled vis-à-vis moral decay has gradually become a criticism of moral judgments; the modern Church is the Church of affirmation and forgiveness of unacknowledged sin; tacitly embracing the culture-of-death… The modern Church seems embarrassed by its former self…

Today – as the Church attempts marketing itself to future generations, marketing agencies are employed to grow the Church (Oh, the sciences may allow us to exploit a market hungry for transcendent meaning… John the Baptist, Jesus, Peter Paul and Co. just unabashedly articulated God’s Word, as did the former growing, thriving old Catholic Church…), wherein the Church’s message must be massaged so as to make the Church amenable to the intransigent sinner i.e., the Church has come to accept obduracy – i.e., impenitent wickedness… When one employs marketers, theological and moral truths (such concepts are scientifically unquantifiable; thus, meaningless barriers to successful marketing…) must be subordinated to full pews...

The old Church structures – we guess – are viewed by marketers (and therefore by modern clergy reliant upon marketers…) as impediments to the future, reminding parishioners that of the stuffy old Catholic Church of prayer penance and the virtue of sacrifice… A new modern Church may come with all the amenities of Joel Osteen’s mega Churches, but flavored with post-modern Catholicism... We suggest – for a while – such marketing schemes will realize a modicum of success, but that ultimately the Church will continue to bleed souls, until, and unless, it again incessantly, and unabashedly teaches the entire gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ…

Thomas J. Donegan

guildma@msn.com 

User Comments

I think we are coming to a period where all religion will fail and will be replaced by a spiritual approach to life that shows we are all connected and love is the only way forward, the realization of heaven on earth.

Hello, Writer!

It is my view - and of course you can explain otherwise (and I'm sure all will want to see your explanation

 

 

 

Hi, Writer!

Love, truth and the moral law cannot be in contradiction with each other; if you feel otherwise please explain how they may, and how a society - or planet of billions - may be ordered by "love" that accepts and promotes perversity as good, true and loving... The only way that such may be realized is via an agency of force! What I expect is that the globe will continue along the path towards perdition and - to your surprise and chagrin - Christ will indeed return...

Cordially, tjd

 

 

 

 

 

On Christ returning, many have tried to come as him and they have been greeted with the same death and fury that begot Christ. And if Christ comes back he will be met with hostility. It is just the nature of the people of the planet. If comes bursting through the skies, the military will take him out. Personally, I don't believe he existed and I don't believe he is coming back, and then I don't believe it matters. The people of the world will have to solve their issues in this temporary journey called life where no one gets to stay permanently. We are all renting space. What matters in the end is the way we treat each other as individuals. Also it is important for each person to leave a legacy that they can be proud of as a personal accomplishment. On morality, it comes down to each persons taste, and hopefully the man made laws we put in place can keep some form of order as it seeks to understand humanity. 

 

Hi, Writer!

 

Undoubtedly, Christ - upon his return - will not be greeted with welcome, but the resurrected Christ - who was God, but enfleshed, will no longer be able to suffer harm; neither all the Military might, nor anything imaginable will alter him coming to make right was is wrong; as he says: "When the Son of Man comes inhis glory, and al the angels with him, he will sit upon his glorious throne, and all of the nations will be assembled before him. And he will separate them one from another, asa shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. He will place the sheep on his right and the goats on his left. Then the king will say to those on his right, Come you who are blessed by my Father. Inherit the Kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world. For I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink, a stranger and you welcomed me, naked and you clothed me, ill and you cared for me, in prison and you visited me. Then the righteous will answer him and say 'Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you drink? When did we see you a stranger and welcome you, or naked and cloth you? When did we see you ill or in prison, and visit you? And the king will say to them in reply, "Amen, I say to you, whatever you did for one of these least brothers of mine, you did for me. Then he will turn to those on his left, "Out of my sight you evildoers, into the pit of unquenchable flames prepared for the devil and his angels. For I was hungry, and you gave me no food, I was thirsty, and you gave me nothing to drink, I was a stranger and you did not welcome me, naked and you gave me no clothing, ill and in prison, and you did not care for me. Then they will answer and say, Lord when did we see you hungry, or thirsty, or a stranger, or naked, or ill, or in prison, and not minister to your needs? He will answer them, "Amen, I say to you, what you did not do for one of these least ones, you did not do for me. And these will go off to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life." Matthew 25: 31-46

 

 Morality is as universal and objective as mathematics; you don't agree with such things because you are a practical nihilist (consciously, or otherwise...), but practical nihilism subsists parasitically off the good; if all people were to come to embrace your views, chaos would quickly become ubiquitous, resulting in the rise of a ubermensch who would bring about, and sustain order by force... By the way that is where the USA is headed...

Cordially, tjd

The things you point out are some moral issues on how we treat the vulnerable among us from a religious view. Maybe Christ foresaw issues the type we have at the border? Maybe he foresaw issues of poverty and how we treat the poor? Sounding more like Bernie Sanders who wants to get the rich to pay what he calls their fair share in taxes.

Are you being judgmental by calling a nihilist? I see a lot of mean if life. I have a family I love. I love writing even published books. I get a lot of meaning out of life even without religion. 

 

Hello, Writer!

 

No Bernie Sanders (a fraud and hypocrite, preying upon the sentiments of the sentimentally disposed… If he were not a fraud and a hypocrite he would have defended POTUS Trump from those which attacked him for Trump’s comments regarding Baltimore; Trump’s comments echo both Sander’s comments from 2015, and Elijah Cumming’s comment from 2003… Sanders utilized public ignorance and public antipathy for Trump – antipathy stoked by Democrats and the Press – to attempt to score political points for himself i.e., for Sanders…) and what he stands for/advocates is a perversion of what Christ advocates. Sanders is rich, by the way; my guess is that Jesus is much more interested in those which obdurately murder innocent babies than he is about what taxes the Government which sponsors those babies death’s is able to extort from its citizens… Those babies are certainly among “the least of His brethren.”

 

Although, if an individual, or group of individuals, choose to avoid understanding subtleties* - as so many do – they conflate Sanders side-show act for the Commandments delineated by the enfleshed God as walked the earth, and allowed himself crucified in obedience to his Father… I don’t point out moral issues; I indicate only what Jesus Christ indicates will happen upon his return, viz: there will be an accounting; those which care for the least of His brethren will be Heaven bound; those which are indifferent or hostile are bound from the fiery pit…

 

* Generally unconsciously; they lack awareness because they are 'feelers' – and thus consumed with how they feel about things, rather than logical consistency… i.e., their thinking is circumscribed i.e., limited/bound, by their ego’s… Thinkers are those which are mindful of contradictions and consistent reasoning; ‘feelers’ are generally oblivious to contradictions; particularly if their interests, or sentiments, are being advanced in their blindness to contradictions...  

 

            Regarding: “Are you being judgmental by calling a nihilist?” The human mind is made to judge; the only being/entity of which humans are aware which have the capacity to judge another to be just, and/or unjust, moral and/or immoral, truthful and/or a liar, rational or a nihilist etc. is a human being. Humans differ from other animals in that humans are sapient beings; not in because of human sentience i.e., the difference is a difference of kind, rather than degree. It is because, and through, judgment which the human essence – sapience – is realized. If the human were not capable of abstract judgment, humans would not be… Thus; yes, I am guilty of judging you a nihilist (I called you a pragmatic/practical nihilist, because you seek to impose meaning upon your life, and those things of which you care; if you were an honest/principled nihilist you’d fall forever compliantly silent…), but it should be understood as descriptive rather than as a pejorative. As (since you are) one that holds morality as relative, and believes in a god that agrees with you (it follows, logically, that you are your god…), it shouldn’t surprise you that I correctly identify you as a nihilist… I wish that you were not a nihilist, but I must deal with you as you are. If you concerned yourself with logical consistency, you would neither be a moral relativist, a nihilist, nor a sentimentalist; moreover, you would make more intellectually rigorous claims/arguments… As it is, I take your claims/arguments about yourself, and about what you view as ‘good,’ ‘right’ and ‘true’ and induce that you are essentially a pragmatic nihilist…

 

And finally if erroneously feel/think that Jesus Christ admonished his followers from judging, then you are in an agreement with the lion-share of modern ‘Christians’/‘Catholics’ that erroneously misunderstand Christ’s admonitions. Christ commands his followers to judge, but to judge justly, rather than sentimentally/emotionally i.e., “by appearances.” Judgment – and its concomitant ‘criticism’ – are necessary tools through which a lover my guide the beloved to amelioration (moral, spiritual, practical, physical…) improvement, and ultimately Heaven i.e., agreement with the Will of the Father (i.e., God). Thus, we offer just one Scriptural command: “If your brother sins, rebuke him. If he repents, forgive him.” Luke 17: 3.

 

Take care, Writer!

 

Cordially, tjd

On judgment, it don't matter to me what Jesus said because I'm not religious.

On belief in God, I think it is important to believe in a god that agrees with me otherwise I will be an individual fighting with myself.

On thinkers and feelings, it seems to be a natural way to be as we are influenced by outside forces like the media.

On Sanders, I may not agree with his policy, but if they presented a list of politicians who seem to fit the Jesus doctrine, I will have to go with Sanders.

On Trump, if he is your standard of today's Christianity then I think the religion is doomed.

Hi, Writer!

You mentioned that I was judging you, or at least that is what it seemed that you were claiming...? Now I don't have any problem judging, or being judged, but - as I indicated - so many people wrongly think Christ admonished those that do judge, Thus, it seemed that you may have been intimating that I was acting in a contrary manner than Christ had commanded, which would seem to make me - in act - repudiating Christ. Thus, I was only explaining that my actions are in fact consistent with those which Jesus Christ indicated how his followers ought to conduct themselves...

Regarding your concept of god, if it were generalized to a population (and such is currently in process...) it will result in dystopia and establish the grounds for the emergence/rise of an absolute dictator... A child that desires to improve at some activity - say playing the guitar - but requires that his/her critics to be approving of his/her performances will likely never progress; informed criticism - sans malice - is necessary for improvement...

One either thinks and circumscribes his/her feelings/sentiments/emotions by those thoughts (such an individual is more-or-less rational), or one allows their feeling to determine their understanding; such an individual is easily manipulated by (as you indicate) Media; such people are those which Stalin referred to as "useful idiots." As I've said, tyrants and would-be tyrants, ascend to power with the aid-and-abetting of such...

Regarding Sanders and Jesus: "...it don't matter to me what Jesus said..."

Trump isn't my standard of anything, but I detest when people take and twist another's words so as to vilify the person to which the distortion is then attributed... Most of the things which are claimed to be have been uttered by POTUS Trump that so many find objectionable are intentional distortions, and misquotes; people like yourself - as you acknowledge above, and in other posts - then form your opinion of people like Trump based upon calumniations... This too is a natural consequence of being sentimentally ordered...

Take care, Writer!

Cordially, tjd

On Trump, I called him out when he made that statement about go back to your countries because I am aware of the implications of his statement both to the freedom of what America wants to stand for and the potential implications on Black and Brown people. What about Trump that doesn't meet your standard?

I agree that the media manipulates our thinking for their agenda. 

My concept of God wouldn't change a thing in our already chaotic world. Jesus said do not judge, now if you are saying that he contradicts himself, I could agree with that as the bible tends to do that.

Hi, Writer!

Trump is a pragmatist, and often chooses courses of action which are similar to those which would be chosen by a conservative; the difference is a pragmatist seeks to make things optimal, to make them work as they were intended to work; there generally is little or no thought to what is the 'good' and what is moral and true. Conservatives seek to advance the good, the true, the just and their view is informed by the natural law (those which call themselves conservatives but deny the natural law, or know not the natural law, are not actually conservatives; those are sentimentalists inveterately traditional/conservative i.e., they reflect their habits, rather than acting in accordance with philosophical principles...). Many things which Trump utters are apppauling -even when they are spot-on, because his delivery lacks any finese. Consequentially, he speaks in a manner which makes it easy for demagogues to distort, and reframe, his words and issues. Generally, Trump - because he is rather uncouth - unintentionally gives ammunition to liars like Pelosi, Obama, Hillary, Naddler, to paint him as a hate-monger, and bigot for people like you to be offended...

If you wish to discuss the words of Jesus Christ, you had bettter get yourself a Bible. To asseret that "Jesus said not to judge" is to do to Jesus Christ what is done to Trump so much of the time. Jesus places conditions upon judging, but he command that we judge, viz: Stop judging by appearances, but judge justly." John 7: 24 (Look it up Writer) and "If your brother sins, rebuke him. If he repents, forgive him." Luke 17: 3 (Again look it up, on must judge in order to assess that one's brother has sinned...). Now I only provided two examples where Christ commands followers to judge; many more could be provided... Jesus doesn't contradict himself, ever! What is requires to resolve apparent contradictions is a discerning, dispassionate intellect...

Take care, Writer!

Cordially, tjd

Good explanation. Thanks for taking the time to do it. I appreciate you.

I note the large gaps between what a madman would consider a paragraph, you wrote this in Word and used the thesaurus didn’t you? It’s awful, the worst, less readable drivel I’ve ever encountered, and here that is, if nothing else an achievement. The Muses only know what that last line means, something about allowing you to murder then sodomise English I should think.

Hello, actual! 

I'm not sure I understand what you write, by: "I note the large gaps between what a madman would consider a paragraph?" If your criticism is to be incisive, you must work on identifying - specifically - what paragraph ostensibly has gaps...? Moreover, the term "madman" is not only vague (an undulating penumbra...), but referencing a madman - as you did - it seems that you are implying that you have an esoteric and empirical knowledge of how judgments are rendered by a madman. Now even if you should homogenize what constitutes the madness - to which you refer - indicating that, or those things, which animates the madman, you should at least make an effort to describe the process, or lack thereof, by which a madman passes judgment upon, or considers the paragraph/s which you reference upon which said madman judges... Without such specifics you appear only to be casting confused aspersions upon those things which you find sentimentally unsettling, because you are dispositionally incapable of rendering an objective, and intellectual critique... 

As to whether I utilized a Word program, and thesaurus...? Whatever for? Although, I do not claim to be a grammarian - as you intimate that you are - I generally am able to express myself, and my thoughts in words, both verbally, and in writing. I generally speak, as I write, but when I speak - I've been told - I am more easily understood, because I supply many particular instances of a general point which I happen to making; moreover, I can generally assess when those listening are getting lost; I try to accommodate my speech to the level of understanding (the culture doesn't encourage people to study; many intelligent individuals suffer from very poor educations...)...

Regarding the last paragraph (It seems I was actually able discern your criticism), it seem that I omitted the word "you" as I addressed "Thewritertwo's" intimation (or at least I thought he was intimating that Christ opposed those which render judgments...); as it is the last paragraph should have read: "And finally if you erroneously feel/think that Jesus Christ admonished his followers from judging, then you are in an agreement with the lion-share of modern ‘Christians’/‘Catholics’ that erroneously misunderstand Christ’s admonitions. Christ commands his followers to judge, but to judge justly, rather than sentimentally/emotionally i.e., “by appearances.” Judgment – and its concomitant ‘criticism’ – are necessary tools through which a lover my guide the beloved to amelioration (moral, spiritual, practical, physical…) improvement, and ultimately Heaven i.e., agreement with the Will of the Father (i.e., God). Thus, we offer just one Scriptural command: “If your brother sins, rebuke him. If he repents, forgive him.” Luke 17: 3.""

And note that I inserted the word "you" as you i.e., as emboldened...

Now, in regards to the rest of your claims, it seems that you have some work to do regarding your use of the English language; although I'm not a grammarian, it should be clear to the most casual observer/reader that your criticism lacks any force due to the lack of specifics, and because of a bit of incoherency (or maybe a bit more than a bit incoherence...)... It seems that you are much more accomplished in assessing your talents, than in demonstrating them...? Moreover, as poorly legible as you seem to be, your inability to cogitate appears to be even pronounced... Because I am one that asserts: "Criticism - sans malice - is an act of love" (presupposed is that the criticism issues from one possessed of more than a rudimentary understanding of those things upon which criticism is leveled...) I recommend - for starters - to help you improve in writing, reasoning and leveling criticism that you study G. K. Chesterton's Orthodoxy. 

Take care, actual-reality!

Cordially, tjd

A sane person would have said, “Yes of course, my apologies”. If you speak like that no wonder you’re a virgin… small mercies.

Hello, actual!

My 'virginity' would certainly surprise my wife and children...? As to sanity, perhaps you should read the incoherent reply you offered me... As it is, I wasn't actually sure you were addressing me. It may be the case that you make sense to yourself, but there isn't anything critical in your criticism... As I wrote, it seems that your sensibilities were offended by my post, and - being unable to mount a critical refutation - you offered a pique...

Cordially, tjd

Sorry would have been enough.

Post A Comment