If a child does something that is bad without knowing that what he/she did was wrong, is it the child's fault? the parents? is it anyones?
If i did something that was wrong, but i didn't know it at the time, is that action considered as a sin?
just thought this was in interesting topic =]

You mean *partial* birth abortion. They don't kill the baby after it comes out, it's simply an abortion during the third trimester. Of course, I don't agree with it, but I don't see ONE issue as any reason to not vote for someone. Abortion is one of the tiniest issues in my mind, because the debate will never go anywhere. Abortion is legal, and it's not going to change, so I don't base my votes off of it at all.

lolwut? It's not a matter of "standing up for personal beliefs" it's whether or not you believe that government should FORCE your beliefs on other people.

Probabally 99.5% of people are against abortion personally (the remaining .5% are sociopaths?) (yes i made up this statistic but you get the point) while 52% of the country is pro-choice (I did not make up that statistic)

Just because Bush didn't pass a law banning premartial sex doesn't mean he wasn't "standing up for his belief's" for a quick analogy. You don't understand the concept. Standing up for your beliefs and using the government to force people into following your beliefs as law are two totally different things. There is nothing stopping a pro-choice person from speaking out against abortion just as much as a pro-lifer.

Personal opinions = effect self and are created by self and influenced by self interest
Politics = effect everyone, should be influenced by everyone and not limited by personal opinion



That's understandable, but in my opinion you should still look into all canadates rather than immediately shunning them because of their party label (That's just what i do). Because I favor the democrats in almost every single way, however my vote would have gone to ron paul, republican. If i would have just shunned him because of his party label then i would not have realized how much i actually supported him.

Granted, obama is more to the left than paul is to the right, but it's just advice that might apply in the future better. Everyone has to fall to either the left or the right at least a little. It's just a label that applies to a broad spectrum, not a set specific classification of opinions. Like...John Edwards, democrat, does not support gay marriage. You know, these things vary. The beliefs of a democrat/republican are not automatically "set in stone" simply because of their label.

Thx for the information, and don't worry, I don't think your crazy for the whole language deal. XD I have an interest in such languages myself.

I was going to say Catholic but... I've been having a delightful time with the Pentecostals. So, in order to be honest, I've chosen other. I love the Catholic church though, the liturgy is deep and meaningful, the music is grand and the atmosphere is brilliant. There is a type of reverence there that can't be described really. The reason I've been having second thoughts though is that there aren't any Catholic churches around with enough believers. The one I go to, although beautiful, is too solemn. So I've traded denominational loyalty for a church that celebrates God a lot more. If only I could find a truly devoted Catholic church... that would be a great gift.

I agree - I mean, personally, I go to a Baptist church, but I'd go to any church that met my spiritual needs. Faith is always more important than denomination or religion.

Hey Andrew, does the Maronite church practice the Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom for their services? I know a lot of Eastern churches do.

* Alexandrian liturgical tradition:
o Coptic Catholic Church (patriarchate): Egypt (1741)
o Ethiopian Catholic Church (metropolia): Ethiopia, Eritrea (1846)
* Antiochian (Antiochene or West-Syrian) liturgical tradition:
o Maronite Church (patriarchate): Lebanon, Cyprus, Jordan, Israel, Palestine, Egypt, Syria, Argentina, Brazil, United States, Australia, Canada, Mexico (union re-affirmed 1182)
o Syriac Catholic Church (patriarchate): Lebanon, Iraq, Jordan, Kuwait, Palestine, Egypt, Sudan, Syria, Turkey, United States and Canada, Venezuela (1781)
o Syro-Malankara Catholic Church (major archiepiscopate): India, United States (1930)
* Armenian liturgical tradition:
o Armenian Catholic Church (patriarchate): Lebanon, Iran, Iraq, Egypt, Syria, Turkey, Jordan, Palestine, Ukraine, France, Greece, Latin America, Argentina, Romania, United States, Canada, Eastern Europe (1742)
* Chaldean or East Syrian liturgical tradition:
o Chaldean Catholic Church (patriarchate): Iraq, Iran, Lebanon, Egypt, Syria, Turkey, United States (1692)
o Syro-Malabar Church (major archiepiscopate): India, United States (at latest, 1599)
* Byzantine (Constantinopolitan) liturgical tradition:
o Albanian Byzantine Catholic Church (apostolic administration): Albania (1628)
o Belarusian Greek Catholic Church (no established hierarchy at present): Belarus (1596)
o Bulgarian Greek Catholic Church (apostolic exarchate): Bulgaria (1861)
o Byzantine Church of the Eparchy of Križevci (an eparchy and an apostolic exarchate): Croatia, Serbia and Montenegro (1611)
o Greek Byzantine Catholic Church (two apostolic exarchates): Greece, Turkey (1829)
o Hungarian Greek Catholic Church (an eparchy and an apostolic exarchate): Hungary (1646)
o Italo-Albanian Catholic Church (two eparchies and a territorial abbacy): Italy (Never separated)
o Macedonian Greek Catholic Church (an apostolic exarchate): Republic of Macedonia (1918)
o Melkite Greek Catholic Church (patriarchate): Syria, Lebanon, Jordan, Israel, Jerusalem, Brazil, United States, Canada, Mexico, Iraq, Egypt and Sudan, Kuwait, Australia, Venezuela, Argentina (1726)
o Romanian Church United with Rome, Greek-Catholic (major archiepiscopate): Romania, United States (1697)
o Russian Byzantine Catholic Church: (two apostolic exarchates, at present with no published hierarchs): Russia, China (1905); currently about 20 parishes and communities scattered around the world, including five in Russia itself, answering to bishops of other jurisdictions
o Ruthenian Catholic Church (a sui juris metropolia, an eparchy, and an apostolic exarchate): United States, Ukraine, Czech Republic (1646)
o Slovak Greek Catholic Church (metropolia): Slovak Republic, Canada (1646)
o Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church (major archiepiscopate): Ukraine, Poland, United States, Canada, Great Britain, Australia, Germany and Scandinavia, France, Brazil, Argentina (1595)

"I am Catholic, ask me questions"

1. Are you human?
if so...
2. Can I touch you?


I'm just kidding bro, one thing I do want to ask is do you still conduct mass entirely in Latin?

Take a look at the original post.



See, thats what I don't get. You give up meat because it tastes so good, but you think sushi tastes good so you eat that instead. What is the point of substituting one enjoyable food for another? That seems so pointless and defeats the entire purpose of the practise.


By the way, this thread has inspired me to fast for today. I've NEVER been successfull in fasting for a day before. So far all I have had is water and chai tea, and it's going to stay that way untill tomorow. For once I feel in control of my eating. I think I'm going to do a fast in which I don't use my computer for a fiew days. That will be more challenging.

Except for the fact that everything Al Gore says is backed up by the climatology and science communities.

This weather guy points at a green screen and says "we have rain coming in from the north" and then turns out to be wrong about it. Yeah, I seriously doubt he's anyone to be taken seriously.

I don't think there really is one. Just confusion.
P.S.
It is hard to give up meat... it's so delicious.

Yes, but you missed the point.

This is where the saying "all religion's can't be true" phrase comes in.

IF their religion is true, then the rest that are contradictory are false, yet you still say that morals came from them. If there religion = false, then it is made by man. If it is made by man, then the morals came from man.

To them is the key word. It doesn't matter what is was "to them" it was either divinely inspired or made by man, and all religion's teach morals, yet they can't ALL be true/divine.

I don't think it's a matter of God going back on His word, I think it's a matter of us going back on ours.

"And pray ye without ceasing in behalf of other men; for there is hope of the repentance, that they may attain to God. For 'cannot he that falls arise again, and he may attain to God.'" Ignatius of Antioch, To the Ephesians, 10 ( A.D. 110).

"[T]hat eternal fire has been prepared for him as he apostatized from God of his own free-will, and likewise for all who unrepentant continue in the apostasy, he now blasphemes, by means of such men, the Lord who brings judgment [upon him] as being already condemned, and imputes the guilt of his apostasy to his Maker, not to his own voluntary disposition." Justin Martyr, fragment in Irenaeus' Against Heresies, 5:26:1 (A.D. 156).

"The remission of sins, therefore, is granted alike to all through baptism: but the grace of the Spirit is proportional to the faith and previous purification. Now, indeed, we receive the first fruits of the Holy Spirit through baptism, and the second birth is for us the beginning and seal and security and illumination s of another life. It behooves as, then, with all our strength to steadfastly keep ourselves pure from filthy works, that we may not, like the dog returning to his vomit, make ourselves again the slaves of sin. For faith apart from works is dead, and so likewise are works apart from faith. For the true faith is attested by works." John of Damascus, On the Orthodox Faith, 4:9 (A.D. 743).

You have united, O Lord, your divinity with our humanity and our humanity with your divinity your life with our mortality and our mortality with your life. You have assumed what is ours, and you have given us what is yours, for the life and salvation of our souls. To you, O Lord, be glory for ever.

Tell your Catholic friend that that is not what the Catholic Church teaches. The Church teaches that the Bible is with out error though personal interpretations may error. I have a feeling that your friend doesn't really know anything about her faith.

"Catholic doctrine" is a subset of the things included by the term "Catholicism". This term also includes non-doctrinal things, such as the history of the RCC.

Moreover, even if these terms were synonymous, asking about doctrines does not require the answers to be doctrinal. Maybe you're confusing this with asking for doctrines.

E.g. "where did the doctrine of XYZ come from" is a question about doctrine, but has an answer outside of doctrine.


Why don't you simply provide the respective doctrinal answers or adress my actual arguments if you disagree with them?

There can be unity among faithful churches as the Biblical pattern is a simple one. The only complications as far as how a church is structured and what it does comes when you start adding in man's traditions.

Now doctrines will differ, but that doesn't have to break unity (unless its something like denying Jesus' divinity or something like that, which would obviously make one not a member of the Lord's church).

I'm sorry you are so ready to quit. Jesus prayed that there would be unity, and I intend to try my best to contend for that unity.

I have to step in here. That is incorrect. The Orthodox Church is one undivided church. We have no disagreements in doctrine or practice. Every Orthodox Church is in unity with one another. The Greek Orthodox, Russian Orthodox, Antiochian Orthodox, etc. are not different churches but all THE SAME CHURCH. The "Greek" or "Russian" in front of "Orthodox" is referring to the background of the PEOPLE who STARTED the church.

For instance, Holy Trinity Greek Orthodox Church in Orlando Florida and St. Petka's Serbian Orthodox Church in Longwood Florida both have different ethnic backgrounds but are IDENTICAL in doctrine and practice and are both in communion with each other.