New Posts

BCP1928 · 2025-10-10T09:31:31-0500

stevevw said:
But why. The same logic that even pretty good symmetry and circularity is achieved by a pretty basic wheel or lathing uses the same logic for more precise symmetry and circularity.

If we can say that rough circularity is cased by a rudimentary rotating device. Then the same logic would follow that very good circularity was achieved by a much better wheel or lathe.

If you can use the logic that at some point roundness requires some sort of rotating device. Then the better the roundness the better the device.

Assuming that the vases were produced by rotating them while being cut--a lathe-like device of some sort--the key to precision is rigidity, not "modernity." Circularity, concentricity, cylindricity all depend on the rigidity of the machine. If the machining was done between centers, then the "lathe" need not even have any rotating parts itself to achieve any desired degree of precision.

stevevw said:
Culture or craftsman. I think its irrelevant as to the signatures and tech. Some cultures like China evolved to make fine china and vases, Others didn't. So the craft as an industry is what produced great craftsman that they specialised.

It may be that as a culture they had evolved knowledge about the workings of nature that allowed them to achieve results beyond the traditional methods.

I was trying to make destinctions and break down the difference between unaided hands say for example in coil pottery that only uses the hands to coil the vase up and then blend it into a vase or pot shape by hands.

The next level is simple tools like chisels and pounders, Its still unaided in that the chiseling and pounding or rubbing is not guided by some machine to achieve the precision. A measuring device adds another piece of tech above unaided hands thus another little aid that helps with precision.

Then the wheel and bore stick are another step in the technical aids. A free hand or a hand with a tool in it but still free moving can be used but the tech is what achieved the circularity.

Then we can go all the way up to sophisticated lathing that is stable and controlled to achieve the greatest precision that eventually reaches the highest levels such as NASA level precision which involved no humans at all.

So all I am do is breaking down the stages of how tech aids in achieving the signatures. Then as others have done reverse engineering the signatures in vases to work out what level of tech had to have been used. Obviously the more precise the more sophisticated the tech.

Yes but like most people have concluded some sort of lathing or wheel was involved. Its a matter of what level of sophistication that was. Or maybe it was something completely different like stone softening which allowed conventional tools to be used. But could still produce similar signatures.

But whatever it was the signatures speak for themselves and show something beyond the orthodox methods which have been tested and cannot reproduce the same signatures.

So what in that you are objecting to me using the same logic but extending it, You think the signatures are caused by some sort of lathing or wheel or bore stick that is wobbly.

I am saying the lathing was more sophisticated based on the same analysis of the signatures that point to lathing in the first place. Just a more elaborate take on your own conclusions that this lathing was more modern like lol.

You probably missed the first part where it was not about anything in particular but that there was advanced tech and knowledge and that the orthodox narrative is flawed.

Coming from you, the phrase "orthodox narrative" is always a straw man.

stevevw said:
is always a straw man.

As a natural consequence the thread went into specific examples and the vases became the main focus in supporting that advanced knowledge. But as I said we could go into many examples and as a total the overall evidence makes a strong case.

But if we only focus on one specific example its easy to get lost in those specifics and lose sight of the overall point. I said I don't mind going into specific as it may help support the advanced knowledge. But now I think its time to move on as it will only continue the same.

eclipsenow · 2025-10-10T09:30:25-0500

camille70 said:
There's going to be a lot more pain for a lot more people if those subsidies expire. I almost didn't renew my health care plan last year because it went up. If it goes up even a quarter more, let alone doubles, I won't be able to afford coverage. I'm trying to get all my vaccines in and prescriptions renewed before January just in case.

I'm so sorry to hear all that. If the USA gets too awful, is there any chance you and yours would move to Australia? Once you became citizens Medicare he is so much better!

essentialsaltes · 2025-10-10T09:30:04-0500

Oompa Loompa said:
Yet a poster on this thread does otherwise in post 127. So your statement is obviously false.

I don't think so. The quoted material is a description of the caricature of empathy that is promoted among those who believe empathy is a sin, not the actual beliefs of people who think empathy is hunky dory.

Fantine's actual message is that churches should not have a "callous disregard for human suffering:"

RocksInMyHead · 2025-10-10T09:29:23-0500

Servus said:
Chickens coming home to roost.

It remains to be seen where they actually land though.

bèlla · 2025-10-10T09:26:25-0500

Tuur said:
People are likely to be murdered for whatever other people want. If people are more likely to be murdered for paper money, it's only because paper money is more common, not because it's fiat currency. Unless someone's flashing it, it doesn't attract that much attention. If someone knows that someone has large sums of money at home, they, too, can become a target.

Precious metals are touted on social media and prepping channels by enthusiasts and others receiving compensation from the companies they mention. It isn’t a product that’s recommended for most and storage is a concern. The first rule of collapse is mobility not gold. Purchasing a home in remote locations or places less prone to upset is the usual step. It doesn’t matter how much gold you have if you’re living in a place that implodes. Safety is more important.

I posted an article a few weeks ago that confirmed the same. It documented wealthy migration around the globe and their reasons for departure. The economy, political climate, social unrest and taxes were common concerns.

~bella

RocksInMyHead · 2025-10-10T09:25:09-0500

Servus said:
Is there any other realistic reason other than facilitating ICE getting their job of rounding up illegal aliens done?

Considering that that's not one of the conditions that grants the President the authority to federalize the Guard, Trump should probably come up with some other justifications if he wants any hope of the courts allowing him to do it.

Michie · 2025-10-10T09:24:52-0500

Count the cost, take up your cross, and follow Christ. This is the basic invitation embedded in all the difficult language about hating family.

It is hard language, but the Church has always read this as rabbinical hyperbole. The Lord doesn’t actually want you to hate your family; he wants you to love your family. But he does want to make clear, as he does in other ways elsewhere, that love for our family is not the central purpose of life, and that the goods of family life should not be placed higher than the goods of divine life. Christ follows this example himself, according to St. Ambrose, when elsewhere he asks, “Who is my mother? Who are my brethren?” (Matt. 12:46). We know quite well that the Lord loves his Mother, but he emphasizes that this love’s stability depends not merely on a natural relationship, but on the mutual love that he and his mother share for the will of God.

Many martyrs of the early Church, as well as modern martyrs in other parts of the world, have faced this stark point of decision, where following Jesus means being rejected by family or friends. There is good reason that several commentators on this passage reference Dietrich Bonhoeffer’s concept of “cheap grace.” Though Bonhoeffer is a Protestant, he criticizes the way that the idea of “salvation by faith alone” can allow “forgiveness without repentance, baptism without church discipline, communion without confession” (The Cost of Discipleship).

Continued below.

Being Catholic Can’t Be Easy

If we never pick up our cross, because somehow we think we are entitled to salvation, we will have chosen the way of death.

www.catholic.com

Michie · 2025-10-10T09:18:41-0500

Turning Point USA (TPUSA) spokesman Andrew Kolvet on Oct. 7 confirmed that a screenshot circulating online accurately depicts text messages Charlie Kirk sent regarding what he described as pressure from Jewish donors that left him “no choice but to leave the pro Israel cause.”

The screenshot was first released by commentator Candace Owens in an Oct. 6 YouTube video. Owens, a former associate of Kirk’s TPUSA, said the messages were sent two days before Kirk’s assassination. She added that Josh Hammer, author of “Israel and Civilization,” and Rob McCoy, known as Kirk’s longtime pastor, were among the nine members of the group chat.

In the texts, Kirk said a donor had withdrawn a $2 million annual pledge to TPUSA after he refused to disinvite Tucker Carlson — who has been sharply critical of Israel — from an event. Kirk wrote that he would not be “bullied” and the dispute was pushing him to abandon the “pro-Israel cause.”

“Just lost another huge Jewish donor,” Kirk wrote in the group chat. “$2 million a year because we won’t cancel Tucker. I’m thinking of inviting Candace.”

“Jewish donors play into all the stereotypes,” he added in another message. “I cannot and will not be bullied like this.”

Continued below.

Kirk’s leaked messages show frustration with Jewish donors

ShareTurning Point USA (TPUSA) spokesman Andrew Kolvet on Oct. 7 confirmed that a screenshot circulating online accurately depicts text messages Charlie Kirk sent regarding what he…

catholicvote.org

NewLifeInChristJesus · 2025-10-10T09:16:12-0500

fhansen said:
The answer is yes, all those things are true for a person who has turned to and remained in Him, showing themselves to be His by how they live: justly, doing good, overcoming sin, not compromising their saved status.

Thanks for clarifying.

Postvieww · 2025-10-10T09:13:43-0500

Fantine said:
Trying to reinvestigate false Biden accusations takes energy away from other needed investigations.
Release the Epsteon files.

See post #6. We are yet to see the final chapter on the Biden family’s activities. I agree on the Epstein files but not for the same reasons as you. If Trump was implicated in illegal activity, the Biden administration would have released that.

Maria Billingsley · 2025-10-10T09:12:14-0500

essentialsaltes said:
The Norwegian Nobel Committee has decided to award the Nobel Peace Prize for 2025 to Maria Corina Machado
for her tireless work promoting democratic rights for the people of Venezuela and for her struggle to achieve a just and peaceful transition from dictatorship to democracy.

The Nobel Peace Prize for 2025 goes to a brave and committed champion of peace – to a woman who keeps the flame of democracy burning amid a growing darkness.

Ms Machado has been a key, unifying figure in a political opposition that was once deeply divided – an opposition that found common ground in the demand for free elections and representative government. This is precisely what lies at the heart of democracy: our shared willingness to defend the principles of popular rule, even though we disagree. At a time when democracy is under threat, it is more important than ever to defend this common ground.

Venezuela has evolved from a relatively democratic and prosperous country to a brutal, authoritarian state that is now suffering a humanitarian and economic crisis. Most Venezuelans live in deep poverty, even as the few at the top enrich themselves. The violent machinery of the state is directed against the country’s own citizens. Nearly 8 million people have left the country. The opposition has been systematically suppressed by means of election rigging, legal prosecution and imprisonment.

Ahead of the election of 2024, Ms Machado was the opposition’s presidential candidate, but the regime blocked her candidacy. She then backed the representative of a different party, Edmundo Gonzalez Urrutia, in the election. Hundreds of thousands of volunteers mobilised across political divides. They were trained as election observers to ensure a transparent and fair election. Despite the risk of harassment, arrest and torture, citizens across the country held watch over the polling stations. They made sure the final tallies were documented before the regime could destroy ballots and lie about the outcome.

The efforts of the collective opposition, both before and during the election, were innovative and brave, peaceful and democratic. The opposition received international support when its leaders publicised the vote counts that had been collected from the country’s election districts, showing that the opposition had won by a clear margin. But the regime refused to accept the election result, and clung to power.

--

White House says Nobel Committee places 'politics over peace'
The White House on Friday criticised the Nobel Prize committee's decision to award the peace prize to a Venezuelan opposition leader instead of U.S. President Donald Trump.

"President Trump will continue making peace deals, ending wars, and saving lives. He has the heart of a humanitarian, and there will never be anyone like him who can move mountains with the sheer force of his will," White House spokesperson Steven Cheung said in a post on X.

"The Nobel Committee proved they place politics over peace."

Congratulations to Maria Corina Machado!

Now let's look at the requirements for receiving a Nobel Peace Prize to counter the Whitehouse criticism.

The Core Criteria (from Alfred Nobel's Will)

* The prize should go to the person or organization who "shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity between nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies, and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses."

Interpretation from the Committee:
* Promoting democracy and human rights. No
* Work toward arms control and disarmament. No
* Peace negotiation. Yes, if Israel and Hamas follow through.
* Efforts to create a more organized and peaceful world. No

In red is my personal opinion on whether or not the sitting President actually meets the criteria to deserve the Prize, realizing everyone has their own interpretation.

Thanks for sharing!

Oompa Loompa · 2025-10-10T09:11:13-0500

Oompa Loompa said:
Trump is not getting the Nobel peace prize. I would be shocked if he did.

I told you so.

essentialsaltes · 2025-10-10T09:11:08-0500

White House declines to engage Democrats as shutdown drags into second week

The White House has yet to engage Democrats on ending the government shutdown, despite the potential political ramifications of the closure.

bbbbbbb · 2025-10-10T09:09:07-0500

Soyeong said:
I do not, though what I happen to be doing is independent of the issue of whether followers of Christ should follow his example of obedience to what God has commanded. Even if I were actively trying to commit as much sin as I can, then that would just mean that I need to repent, not that I was wrong about the fact that followers of Christ should follow his example of obedience to what God has commanded.

You seem to be diverting from the topic of "the set of laws which God has given". Assuming that you believe that the example of Jesus' obedience to what God has commanded includes obedience to all of the commandments in the Bible, then it is no small thing to disobey what, for many, are trivial and outdated commandments such as kindling a fire on the Sabbath. I assume (correct me if I am mistaken) that you eat only cold food on the Sabbath.

Hentenza · 2025-10-10T09:07:19-0500

Mercy Shown said:
Romans 3:20 declares, “For by works of the law no human being will be justified in his sight, since through the law comes knowledge of sin.” Some interpreters have argued that Paul is speaking of two distinct laws: the ceremonial law, which could not justify, and the moral law, which continues to bind believers. This reading, however, is a later development in Christian history rather than Paul’s own intent.

In the early church, figures like Irenaeus, Origen, Chrysostom, and Augustine typically read Paul’s reference to “the law” (nomos) as the Mosaic law in its entirety. They emphasized that the law reveals sin but does not bring righteousness, and they did not suggest that Paul was distinguishing between two different laws.

A more formal distinction emerged in medieval theology. Thomas Aquinas articulated a tripartite division of the Mosaic law: moral, ceremonial, and judicial. The moral law expressed timeless ethical principles, the ceremonial law governed Israel’s worship and sacrifices, and the judicial law regulated Israel’s civic life. Although Aquinas did not claim Paul himself made this division, his framework shaped subsequent readings of Romans.

During the Reformation, Martin Luther and John Calvin emphasized justification by faith apart from works of the law. To preserve the ongoing authority of the Ten Commandments while rejecting salvation by works, they leaned on the moral/ceremonial distinction. Calvin in particular stressed that the moral law still bound believers, while the ceremonial law had been fulfilled in Christ. This approach encouraged Protestants to interpret Romans 3:20 as if Paul were distinguishing between different kinds of law.

In the centuries that followed, Protestant confessions such as the Westminster Confession of Faith (1646) codified this division, and it became common for preachers and commentators to read Romans 3:20 through that lens. The two-law theory thus served as a theological tool in debates over antinomianism, allowing Christians to affirm both salvation by grace and the necessity of obedience.

Modern scholarship, however, has largely set aside the two-law framework as an anachronism. Studies of Second Temple Judaism have shown that Jews of Paul’s day viewed Torah as a unified covenant, not as divisible into moral and ceremonial parts. Scholars such as E.P. Sanders and proponents of the “New Perspective on Paul” argue that Paul’s concern was not with distinguishing kinds of laws but with showing that Torah as a whole cannot justify. For Paul, the law in its entirety reveals sin, but righteousness comes only through faith in Christ.

In sum, the theory that Paul spoke of two laws in Romans 3:20 reflects later theological developments, especially medieval and Reformation attempts to reconcile Paul’s teaching with the continuing role of God’s commands. While historically influential, it does not appear to be what Paul himself meant.

Even as a Protestant I have always viewed the law as a unified law including the moral, ceremonial, and judicial. I also view the law to contain the 10 commandments. Christ fulfilled the law in the same sense as fulfilling the terms of a contract. The old covenant is fulfilled because Christ sacrifice met and exceeded the terms of the old contract. The new contract (new covenant) has its own terms.

bbbbbbb · 2025-10-10T09:05:02-0500

FredVB said:
That applies more widely than it being said here. When we are to judge things it is for knowing sin that we ourselves should not do. If we tell others what is sin we should have the passages to show that, if they who we would tell are also believers and somehow do not know of that. But much being seen as sin is not indicated as sin from the Bible and would be thought that way only from social values or values we learn from somewhere else. So it is not good to judge individuals, that is for leaving to God, who knows what is within all of us.

I do all I can to remember this, I speak for things that are better, including to remember what God said to remember in the Bible, to do as we can accordingly. And though I get responses telling me not to judge others as it is said that I do, I am not judging anyone with speaking of what is better, and I am not commanding even when speaking of what God gave in commandments. It is left for others to see whatever they will from it, as they live before God

I agree. In all of your posts I would say that you are not being judgmental even thought there have been sometimes strong disagreements.

bbbbbbb · 2025-10-10T09:02:43-0500

fli · 2025-10-10T09:02:28-0500

Soyeong said:
We need to die to the law of sin in order to be free to obey the Law of God, not the other way around. In Titus 2:14, it does not say that Jesus gave himself to free us from God's law but in order to free us from all lawlessness and to purify for himself a people of his own possession who are zealous for doing good works, so the freedom that we have in Christ is not the freedom to sin but the freedom from sin.

Romans 8: 10 by God's word if the Spirit of Jesus is in us we are dead physically. We cannot sin because dead men are not under the law.

Soyeong said:
Everyone who has faith will be declared righteous and everyone who has faith is a doer of God's law, which is how Paul can deny in Romans 4:1-5 that we can earn our righteousness as the result of our works while also affirming in Roman 2:13 that only the doers of the law will be declared righteous. In 1 John 3:4-10, everyone who is a doer of righteous works in obedience to God's law is righteous even as they are righteous and those who are not doers of righteous works in obedience to God's law are not children of God. Jesus embodied the righteousness of God through his works by setting a sinless example for us to follow of how to walk in obedience to God's law, so that is what we also have the gift of getting to obey the we receive the gift of the righteousness of God.

Are you are saying that we have to do works of the law to be righteous?

Romans 10:1 Brethren, my heart's desire and my prayer to God for them is for their salvation. 2 For I testify about them that they have a zeal for God, but not in accordance with knowledge. 3 For not knowing about God's righteousness and seeking to establish their own, they did not subject themselves to the righteousness of God. 4 For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes. NASU

Anyone, who says that Christians have obey the law to be righteous, does not believe in Jesus. In verse 3 those who are ignorant of God's righteousness seek to establish their own righteousness, by doing the law. If anyone does not believe that Jesus makes them righteous, they think that they must do the law. God's righteousness is through faith not works. It seems to me that you might believe that James, the brother of Jesus, said one must have works to have a saving faith.

Since the apostle James, brother of Jesus, used Abraham to prone a point about salvation in the NT, I will use an OT saint, David, to prove another point about salvation. Since both Abraham and David are listed in Hebrews 11 as having saving faith, I know they both are sons of God. Because of that I know in Romans chapter 8, where Paul describes what true believers do to be in the Spirit, they have reached being sons in verse 14.

First David's sins read 2Samuel 12: 7- 15.

Every Christian should know what King David did. He committed adultery with Bathsheba and had Uriah, her husband, killed to cover his crime. Under OT laws He committed 3 sins that could not be forgiven. David committed both sins, adultery and murder, in a high handed way, Numbers 15:30, putting them both as the worst sins under the OT law. There was no sacrifice for what David did but death to both her and him. David was unrepentant for more than 9 months.

Romans 8:1 Therefore there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus. 2 For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has set you free from the law of sin and of death. 3 For what the Law could not do, weak as it was through the flesh, God did: sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and as an offering for sin, He condemned sin in the flesh, 4 so that the requirement of the Law might be fulfilled in us, who do not walk according to the flesh but according to the Spirit. 5 For those who are according to the flesh set their minds on the things of the flesh, but those who are according to the Spirit, the things of the Spirit. 6 For the mind set on the flesh is death, but the mind set on the Spirit is life and peace, 7 because the mind set on the flesh is hostile toward God; for it does not subject itself to the law of God, for it is not even able to do so, 8 and those who are in the flesh cannot please God. 9 However, you are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, if indeed the Spirit of God dwells in you. But if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he does not belong to Him. 10 If Christ is in you, though the body is dead because of sin, yet the spirit is alive because of righteousness. 11 But if the Spirit of Him who raised Jesus from the dead dwells in you, He who raised Christ Jesus from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies through His Spirit who dwells in you. 12 So then, brethren, we are under obligation, not to the flesh, to live according to the flesh — 13 for if you are living according to the flesh, you must die; but if by the Spirit you are putting to death the deeds of the body, you will live. 14 For all who are being led by the Spirit of God, these are sons of God. 15 For you have not received a spirit of slavery leading to fear again, but you have received a spirit of adoption as sons by which we cry out, "Abba! Father!" 16 The Spirit Himself testifies with our spirit that we are children of God, 17 and if children, heirs also, heirs of God and fellow heirs with Christ, if indeed we suffer with Him so that we may also be glorified with Him. NASU

If a Christian committed the sins in the NT that David committed the scriptures above describe what would happen to him. Again, since both Abraham, used by James, and David are saints, listed in Hebrews 11, we know they both had passed from death to life. That means they both had proven records of hearing and obeying God's word, they both had spiritual minds. In Romans above it means verse 6 applied to them. With spiritual minds they responded by obeying Jesus' directions. They both were sons of God. John 10: 1-6 Once a Christian proves they have a spiritual mind and follow Jesus' voice they prove they are one of His sheep. Therefore, our NT David had passed through Romans above down to verse 17.

Romans 4:5 But to the one who does not work, but believes in Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is credited as righteousness, 6 just as David also speaks of the blessing on the man to whom God credits righteousness apart from works: 7 "BLESSED ARE THOSE WHOSE LAWLESS DEEDS HAVE BEEN FORGIVEN, AND WHOSE SINS HAVE BEEN COVERED. 8 "BLESSED IS THE MAN WHOSE SIN THE LORD WILL NOT TAKE INTO ACCOUNT." NASU

(First in the above, the one who does not work means, if one is doing work for righteousness, they do not have faith. Which means they do not have righteousness through faith)

Because our NT David was in Jesus and Jesus was in Him, God did not impute any sin to David all the time he was unrepentant. God treated him as a disobedient child. If our David had not repented, meaning David was not obeying Jesus' voice, God would have quit fulfilling the law of sin and death for David. God would have put David to sleep, killed him physically.

1 Corinthians 3:10 According to the grace of God which was given to me, like a wise master builder I laid a foundation, and another is building on it. But each man must be careful how he builds on it. 11 For no man can lay a foundation other than the one which is laid, which is Jesus Christ. 12 Now if any man builds on the foundation with gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, straw, 13 each man's work will become evident; for the day will show it because it is to be revealed with fire, and the fire itself will test the quality of each man's work. 14 If any man's work which he has built on it remains, he will receive a reward. 15 If any man's work is burned up, he will suffer loss; but he himself will be saved, yet so as through fire. NASU

Our David, for the year he was unrepentant he had built with wood. If he did not repent God would have put him to sleep. Our David would have entered heaven smelling of smoke. Our David was not known as an adulterer or a murderer when he arrived in heaven as God never imputed those sins to him.

The only commandments believers in Jesus have to obey for salvation are:

1 John 3:21 Beloved, if our heart does not condemn us, we have confidence before God; 22 and whatever we ask we receive from Him, because we keep His commandments and do the things that are pleasing in His sight. 23 This is His commandment, that we believe in the name of His Son Jesus Christ, and love one another, just as He commanded us. 24 The one who keeps His commandments abides in Him, and He in him. We know by this that He abides in us, by the Spirit whom He has given us. NASU

The commandments we are to keep for salvation are in verse 23. If we keep those commandments we abide in Jesus and He in us.

1 John 3:4 Whoever commits sin also commits lawlessness, and sin is lawlessness. 5 And you know that He was manifested to take away our sins, and in Him there is no sin. 6 Whoever abides in Him does not sin (see 1John 3: 24 above). Whoever sins has neither seen Him nor known Him. NKJV

Anyone who abides in Jesus does not sin. They may be disobedient children, but God does not impute sin to disobedient children. (Romans 8: 10) We cannot commit lawlessness because, by God's word He, considers our flesh dead and the law does not apply to dead men.

bbbbbbb · 2025-10-10T09:01:30-0500

peace and unity if we are to succeed.

Division and rancor . . .

bbbbbbb · 2025-10-10T09:00:43-0500

Down comforters are the best!

BPPLEE · 2025-10-10T08:59:18-0500

Michie · 2025-10-10T08:57:15-0500

Note: Below is the lecture I gave at the Union League Club in Chicago on Friday, June 14, 2019, as part of the lecture series of the Catholic Citizens of Illinois. My lecture could have been given the alternative title: “The Death Penalty for the Catechism? A How-To Guide for Excluding a Text from the Catholic Tradition.” Fortuitously, the lecture came at the end of an eventful week in Illinois and in Baltimore. On Wednesday, June 12, the state of Illinois disgraced itself by the passage of the most extreme pro-abortion legislation yet seen in the United States. Ironically, those who celebrate the indiscriminate murder of innocent children are usually opposed to capital punishment for guilty criminals, and the reasoning is consistent: the unborn, not having consciousness of their own personal dignity, cannot defend themselves, so the strong may do away with them at pleasure; but adults, no matter how wicked, are recognized as autonomous individuals with inviolable dignity who must be given free room and board by the state for the remainder of their lives. Then, on Thursday, June 13, the United States bishops voted, by a huge majority (194 in favor, 8 against, 3 abstentions), to alter the text of the U.S. Catholic Catechism for Adults to bring it in line with Pope Francis’s novel teaching on the death penalty. The revolution in moral teaching thus continues unabated.

What is a catechism? How would you answer that question?

A standard dictionary definition runs like this: “a summary of the principles of Christian religion in the form of questions and answers, used for the instruction of Christians.” Wikipedia, which as we all know is hit or miss, does a decent job: “A catechism (from Ancient Greek κατηχέω, to teach orally) is a summary or exposition of doctrine and serves as an introduction to the Sacraments” and for the “Christian religious teaching of children and of adult converts. Catechisms are doctrinal manuals—often in the form of questions followed by answers to be memorized.”[2]
https://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=19978542#_edn2
It seems to me that this is the answer of history, of Church practice, and of what we might call “supernatural common sense.” A catechism is a convenient guide to what the Church teaches; more than that, a guide to what she has always taught and will always teach. A good catechism is like a clean, smooth, untainted mirror that reflects the content of the Catholic Faith and nothing else.

A poor catechism—like the infamous 1966 Dutch Catechism that caused so much trouble after the Council—is, on the contrary, a cloudy, scratched, bent, or chipped mirror that does not lucidly reflect the Faith. Good catechisms preserve and pass on the teaching of Christ and His Church, while bad catechisms distort it, or one-sidedly exaggerate it, or muffle or silence it.

Francis’s change to the Catechism

Continued below.

“What Good is a Changing Catechism? Revisiting the Purpose and Limits of a Book” — Dr. Kwasniewski’s Chicago Lecture

Note: Below is the lecture I gave at the Union League Club in Chicago on Friday, June 14, 2019, as part of the lecture series of the Cathol...

rorate-caeli.blogspot.com

Hentenza · 2025-10-10T08:55:49-0500

Apple Sky said:
We have here the three astronauts of Apollo 11 clearly stating that they never saw the stars & you call it nonsense

They never saw the stars FROM THE SURFACE OF THE MOON because of the daylight reflection off the moon surface almost just like on Earth you can’t see that stars during the day. Listen to what they are actually saying.

New Posts

New Posts

The Norwegian Nobel Committee has decided to award the Nobel Peace Prize for 2025 to Maria Corina Machado​

White House says Nobel Committee places 'politics over peace'​

White House declines to engage Democrats as shutdown drags into second week​

Filter

Forum statistics

Share this page

The Norwegian Nobel Committee has decided to award the Nobel Peace Prize for 2025 to Maria Corina Machado

White House says Nobel Committee places 'politics over peace'

White House declines to engage Democrats as shutdown drags into second week