I like Celestine V. After the Cardinals had taken two years without electing a new pope, the future-Celestine, a famed Benedictine monk, wrote them a letter warning them of divine retribution if they didn’t fulfill their duties. So… they elected him pope. He absolutely refused and tried to run away but eventually a bunch of cardinals and two kings persuaded him.
Celestine drafted rules on how conclaves were to be held in an expedited manner, clarified that popes could resign, and then resigned.
…Only to be put in prison by his successor so nobody could rally behind him as an antipope. He died in prison and was later canonized.
I like the version from Oxford University Press, which appears to have been translated by Barry Windeatt.
There are definitely a lot of bizarre translations out there. But if the one you’re reading is not striking you as weird, it’s probably fine.
One audiobook version I have translates every instance of “sin” to “missing the mark” (yes, the original meaning, but not what Julian meant), and seemed to gloss over all mentions of hell.
God doesn't really give revelations of this nature. What would be the point?
Besides, it's a known forgery. And pretty dubious looking in any case.
Pretty much what the Council of Trent was about. That and Lutheranism.
Right? Wild. Why bother??
He was an Episcopal priest.
I appreciate the warning, I guess, but it sure sounds like just normal Hispanic folks who love St. Jude and are entrepreneurial and need to make some money. I don’t know that “officially licensed St. Jude gear” is something we need to be concerned about.
There’s also a relic of St. Jude at Saint Dominic’s Church in San Francisco, and they bless people with it after every daily 5:30 Mass.
I'd suggest you do nothing but ask questions. You won't win a debate, and you will only make things awkward if you try. I'm not saying agree with anything your friend suggests, just ask them how they came to have that view, and so on.
Some examples include, where do you think the universe came from? Is there any objective morality or good and evil? How have your beliefs changed or developed over the years? Who do you think is a good source of information on these matters? What is most important to you in your life? What do you need to be happy?
This way you can have a good conversation, you can make a good impression, you don't need to agree with anything, and you might seed some future reconsideration when they realize their answers don't hold up to scrutiny.
Not an op. Taylor was sincere at first, originally documenting his conversion.
But the YouTube algorithm rewards controversy, and he currently makes a living off his media presence. It's a risky thing for a Catholic to do.
(You might want to remove the formatting on your list, because it currently doesn't wrap right on web. I'll delete this afterward.)
Indeed. We always manage to screw up in one direction or another.
Do you think there are a lot of lukewarm Catholics spending their free time looking at a Catholic subreddit
Classic ways are volunteer to help at a soup kitchen or homeless shelter.
There are programs that bring food to housebound old people.
Big Brother / Big Sister programs for kids without role models in their lives.
Best, of course, if there’s some individual(s) you know that needs assistance or company or money.
I only watched a few episodes (mostly because I forgot to keep watching…) and I thought it was pretty good.
I liked the demon tormenting the poor seminarian 😂
Okay, thank you.
Do you understand that there are levels of gravity even in the 10 commandments? Like, stealing a pencil is different than stealing a lot of money? Lying about something minor with the intention to be kind is different than maliciously lying to get ahead? An insult isn’t as serious as violence? And so on.
One of the aspects of mortal sin is, not only is it gravely wrong, but because it’s gravely wrong, there’s no mistaking that you did it and you meant to do it. There are consequences to a grave sin. You had to plan it and/or take some deliberate, unmistakeable action.
What is your understanding of “grave matter”?
I’m going to contradict everyone and say that the Bible wasn’t meant to “prove” anything. It tells various stories for people who already believe.
All that said… the fact that the prophecies in the Old Testament were dramatically filled in the facts of Jesus’ life, was compelling proof for those who initially heard the preaching of the Apostles.
The pope has repeatedly said that liturgies should be reverent and following rubrics.
But there are over 400,000 priests in the world. The Vatican does not have the time for that kind of micromanagement, nor is it really their purview. Disciplining them is the duty of their bishops.
This is why you see a big variation in reverence from diocese to diocese.
Not sure I ever really did. There has been skimming. On several occasions.
There's no special words, but yes, in danger of death this is an option.
[Can. 1116]() §1. If a person competent to assist according to the norm of law cannot be present or approached without grave inconvenience, those who intend to enter into a true marriage can contract it validly and licitly before witnesses only:
1/ in danger of death;
2/ outside the danger of death provided that it is prudently foreseen that the situation will continue for a month.
§2. In either case, if some other priest or deacon who can be present is available, he must be called and be present at the celebration of the marriage together with the witnesses, without prejudice to the validity of the marriage before witnesses only.
Yeah. And then reintroduced it more recently to combat clericalism.
I think you're being unnecessarily nitpicky, in a context where we all know what we mean by "wine."
I can't think of any teachings revealed in the Bible and tradition that have been changed recently. Is there some example you're specifically thinking of, or is it more the optics?
(I'm not saying the optics don't matter.)
The Church is trying too hard to be inclusive
Catholicism