thormas

Amen!

He's just at war with his everybody else...........:=} No war with Russia? Except for the cyber attack and the interference in an American election- but otherwise............!

I think he is a failure and an embarrassment to the country. His denial of the Russian 'interference," his attacks on the press, the FBI, Justice, his name calling, his bullying, his insistence on the wall, his taunting of other leaders, his ignorance, his infatuation with Fox news, people having to be careful how they present info because of his sensitivity, his treatment and dismissal of women, his lust for his daughter, and so much more. I think he has enough time................:+}

Way to ruin a special moment Rom :=) And, much was meant to be amusing, including references to the Lord. One, at least not this one, is never fully finished 'thinking through' particular issues, this one included. But you are correct when you said, in spite of that, I have formed new beliefs. I am reminded of something Spong wrote in that sometimes you have to say what is not (deconstruct) before you attempt to say what something (might be) is (i.e. construct). So, in that spirit, long ago, and for various reasons, I made a decision against certain traditional, theistic, Christian beliefs about the 'afterlife - in line with other new beliefs I had come to. So, I know what I don't believe (previously listed above) and have some new notions but I honestly don't spend much time on it because other issues (example theodicy, incarnation, human actualization, etc.) are more interesting/intriguing at this time. Besides, I know what I believe about "God' - so I leave the details of the 'afterlife' to 'him' and occasionally return to it when time permits or something I read makes a connection and I explore it further. I was never a deist (as you were) so I don't know what deism might believe about life after death. And, I, too, didn't have parents who tried to inculcate such myths: they (the myths, the beliefs) were merely part of the landscape of a Catholic childhood. We believed them but nobody was delving into them, especially kids and teenagers - as we were busy with our lives. However, as I grew, studied philosophy and then theology, along with other subjects - I did become intrigued and delved into them. In part, I wanted to do - simply I was curious (that's what great professors did for me: they piqued my curiosity and enabled me to satiate it) and, also, it was my job - I was a theology teacher (before going into business) and you never know a subject as well as you do when you have to present it to others (in my and many teachers opinions). I agree with the 'constant energy input' but, for me, the human encompasses or is part of the so called 'immaterial.' It is all of a piece. I need a framework also (that is what systematic theology is about) but, and here is our difference, I don't need evidence or proof. Rather there is an openness to this sort of 'thing' and it 'makes sense' or resonates with me (my experience) - then I try to find ways to think and talk about it (for my self but also) for others who might be open - so it might become (more) reasonable and might 'speak' to them - and then they can take it and do with it what they will.

I read theology not new age so it's not my cup of tea. when time permits will look at the link.

Finally - agreement :+}

They have changed. Not sure what you mean by new age so we will leave that on the side and no idea if it is (only) consciousness, something different or something more.

Good Lord, Rom you do need clarification upon clarification, even though I listed things which are no longer beliefs to include, since we're quoting: "Angels, demons, the Devil/Satan, hell, limbo, and the traditional theistic notions of heaven and purgatory (but not the possible reality of these last two)." So it should be apparent from the ( ) following heaven and purgatory, that I consider them possible realities, i.e. not no longer believed. Further, 'continuation of life' was not listed in what I no longer believe - so it is a continuing and current belief (not dropped). So, to clarify the clarification: I have not lost belief in the meaningfulness and continuation of life (although I have no details of the latter). If by vernacular you mean the ordinary (formerly) accepted take on after life, the answer would be No given what I originally said: I no longer believe " ... ...traditional theistic notions of heaven and purgatory" but......... I continue to believe/allow for "the possible reality of these.... " - thus belief is maintained, albeit not the Catholic/Christian vernacular.

.

see above

meaningfulness and "continuation of life"

I have no real opinion on the soul (simply not something I have given much thought to over the years) but I do, as previously stated on other threads, believe - without getting into it here - the meaningfulness/purposefulness/fullness of life which suggests that a 'continuation' of life or a 'deepening' of consciousness - beyond (more than) this particular life.

I never considered it ups and downs (might have been?) just an evolution due to exposure to new insights. One Benedictine monastery is in Latrobe, PA but the Jesuit conferences and presentations sound like great possibilities. I go to similar conferences at UNC-Chapel Hill where I have attended Bart Ehrman seminars, Duke professors and others. Great stuff, never gets old.

Craig, I like Francis and fondly remember, although a bit young, John XXIII and the first John Paul. Did not like JPII or Benedict. I knew Jesuits at Marquette but was more familiar with the Benedictines I knew while at college. Also, liked what we called the Seculars, ones who were our priests when I was growing up and later I taught with them (like all of us, some were great, others not so much). I have never given thought to Francis and the Jesuits, so nothing to offer on the spot. I think there are many orders who live the teachings of Jesus. As for the sex police, again I don't think much about that 'function' anymore but it was the a Benedictine priest/monk/philosopher who taught one of the most popular courses my senior year: The Phenomenology of Sexuality. I am not nor have I ever been a big fan of asceticism (as I understand it) and in terms of the Catholic orders (although I liked the Franciscans and Jesuits) the Benedictines were the ones I knew best: some were brilliant scholars, others simple brother who ran the fire department on campus, picked up a blade of grass and played it like a musical instrument to entertain and amaze a group of 'world wise' college guys, directed the theater, were artists, lived in the dorms as Resident Assistants and when I was sick Freshman year, made me my first hot toddy which cured me. My first (and only) miracle:+} Even the philosophy scholar I mentioned, in his spare time, tended his garden, fondly remembered to this day as Sebastian's Garden. I have a friend who loves Martin and I have saved some articles on/by him but have never concentrated on him. And I have not does the kind of study required to comment on your views of the Jesuits. What was amazing was that I got my masters in Systematic Theology from a Catholic Seminary in the 80s and we studied a number of authors that were later silenced or 'edited.'. But we had priests, educated in some of the best schools of theology in the world, who encouraged these works (and truly open discussions/debates) and we had classes with seminarians (I wasn't, nor did I ever want or intend to be, one), lay men and women, teachers, nuns and women priest/ministers from other denominations. If that mindset had continued...........might have been a different world. Sort of interesting how the conservatives are pushing back on Francis. I would be glad to try to answer any future questions or discuss Catholicism (in addition to Christianity in general) and I will look into Martin a bit more.

.

?

There you go! But Santa is no trivial matter.........

Trivial? Humor Rom, humor!

Right so you are saying, IYO, the site derailed or ........... violated what you think are the teachings/actions of Jesus. So we agree violate or derail: either works. Although, I disagree with the assessment. 'Worthy' - and now comes judgement - a violation or derailment of the teachings of Jesus. Not really clearer (poh-bahs?) and I would remind you of the etiquette (capacity to comprehend?) but as you said : "I (i.e. you) exit hereby?" Don't derail or violate your word.

I disagree: I don't think the rules of etiquette for the site violate the teachings or the real meaning of the message of Jesus. And this house "is worthy."

Actually it wasn't, as indicated - just pointing it out - so we are on the same page :+} And, in case you missed it: a little humor amid the intensity........ And, with you comment, "beyond your capacity" it seems you have violated a number of the points of etiquette.

Easter Bunny and Tooth Fairy definitely, still hold out hope for Santa Claus or, more accurately, have rethought the spirit of SC as (it has always been anyway) lived out in us. The theistic notion of God in his heaven but not the reality of the Sacred Angels (right shoulder), demons, the Devil/Satan (left shoulder, always insulting since I am left handed), hell, limbo, and the traditional theistic notions of heaven and purgatory (but not the possible reality of these last two) traditional understanding of Eucharist, confession, baptism ( after all, I was RC - but again not their value) all male, celibate priesthood (as the only option) literal interpretation of the Bible (although not a very big issue for Catholics) traditional/theistic understanding of incarnation (as defined above), original sin, salvation (but not the possible reality of these and a more modern/progressive take) miracles Holy Days Immaculate Conception, Annunciation, Virgin Birth, Ascension and (bodily) Resurrection 2nd Coming RC leadership: Pope, bishops, priests other issues like homosexuality, the role of women, the inerrancy of the Bible - there were traditional takes on these but they were not on the front burner and when changed came, it was not difficult to be part of that new 'consciousness.' physical location of heaven (first star to the right........) priority of Catholicism Catholic Catechism Adam & Eve (a tough loss) Saints (as traditionally understood) reality/accuracy of the stations of the cross and Passion Plays limbo (another tough loss since it was a picture of all little kids floating around with God) the superiority of the northeast USA latin mass I haven't thought on this overly much but 'we' came of age when the world, the US, was throwing off all forms of authority (the government, the Church, any and every authority) and being in college at that time, all the freedom in the world to question, read, think, argue even on a Catholic campus - so, in hindsight, might have been an easier transition than many - plus although brought up Catholic, I was never raised by parents who were fanatically religious.

Yeah - me too :+}

say who now - ThomasM????????

I have found what gives life meaning and thanks. And, even though I borrowed from Sisyphus and Greek myths, it's more accurate to say, "all power to you and panentheistic (or even progressive) Christian theology." Twas fun!