The United SpongeBob Forums
Off Topic => Everything Else => Debate Den => Topic started by: MiraclrPlz on July 08, 2007, 10:49:00 pm
-
HERE IS WHAT POPE BENEDICT XVI SAID!
Papal Explanatory Letter
to the Apostolic Letter
SUMMORUM PONTIFICUM [in Latin; in English]
My dear Brother Bishops,
With great trust and hope, I am consigning to you as Pastors the text of a
new Apostolic Letter "Motu Proprio data" on the use of the Roman liturgy
prior to the reform of 1970. The document is the fruit of much reflection,
numerous consultations and prayer.
News reports and judgments made without sufficient information have
created no little confusion. There have been very divergent reactions
ranging from joyful acceptance to harsh opposition, about a plan whose
contents were in reality unknown.
This document was most directly opposed on account of two fears, which I
would like to address somewhat more closely in this letter.
In the first place, there is the fear that the document detracts from the
authority of the Second Vatican Council, one of whose essential decisions
– the liturgical reform – is being called into question. This fear is
unfounded. In this regard, it must first be said that the Missal published
by Paul VI and then republished in two subsequent editions by John Paul
II, obviously is and continues to be the normal Form – the Forma ordinaria
– of the Eucharistic Liturgy. The last version of the Missale Romanum
prior to the Council, which was published with the authority of Pope John
XXIII in 1962 and used during the Council, will now be able to be used as
a Forma extraordinaria of the liturgical celebration. It is not
appropriate to speak of these two versions of the Roman Missal as if they
were "two Rites". Rather, it is a matter of a twofold use of one and the
same rite.
As for the use of the 1962 Missal as a Forma extraordinaria of the liturgy
of the Mass, I would like to draw attention to the fact that this Missal
was never juridically abrogated and, consequently, in principle, was
always permitted. At the time of the introduction of the new Missal, it
did not seem necessary to issue specific norms for the possible use of the
earlier Missal. Probably it was thought that it would be a matter of a few
individual cases which would be resolved, case by case, on the local
level. Afterwards, however, it soon became apparent that a good number of
people remained strongly attached to this usage of the Roman Rite, which
had been familiar to them from childhood. This was especially the case in
countries where the liturgical movement had provided many people with a
notable liturgical formation and a deep, personal familiarity with the
earlier Form of the liturgical celebration. We all know that, in the
movement led by Archbishop Lefebvre, fidelity to the old Missal became an
external mark of identity; the reasons for the break which arose over
this, however, were at a deeper level. Many people who clearly accepted
the binding character of the Second Vatican Council, and were faithful to
the Pope and the Bishops, nonetheless also desired to recover the form of
the sacred liturgy that was dear to them. This occurred above all because
in many places celebrations were not faithful to the prescriptions of the
new Missal, but the latter actually was understood as authorizing or even
requiring creativity, which frequently led to deformations of the liturgy
which were hard to bear. I am speaking from experience, since I too lived
through that period with all its hopes and its confusion. And I have seen
how arbitrary deformations of the liturgy caused deep pain to individuals
totally rooted in the faith of the Church.
Pope John Paul II thus felt obliged to provide, in his Motu Proprio
Ecclesia Dei (2 July 1988), guidelines for the use of the 1962 Missal;
that document, however, did not contain detailed prescriptions but
appealed in a general way to the generous response of Bishops towards the
"legitimate aspirations" of those members of the faithful who requested
this usage of the Roman Rite. At the time, the Pope primarily wanted to
assist the Society of Saint Pius X to recover full unity with the
Successor of Peter, and sought to heal a wound experienced ever more
painfully. Unfortunately this reconciliation has not yet come about.
Nonetheless, a number of communities have gratefully made use of the
possibilities provided by the Motu Proprio. On the other hand,
difficulties remain concerning the use of the 1962 Missal outside of these
groups, because of the lack of precise juridical norms, particularly
because Bishops, in such cases, frequently feared that the authority of
the Council would be called into question. Immediately after the Second
Vatican Council it was presumed that requests for the use of the 1962
Missal would be limited to the older generation which had grown up with
it, but in the meantime it has clearly been demonstrated that young
persons too have discovered this liturgical form, felt its attraction and
found in it a form of encounter with the Mystery of the Most Holy
Eucharist, particularly suited to them. Thus the need has arisen for a
clearer juridical regulation which had not been foreseen at the time of
the 1988 Motu Proprio. The present Norms are also meant to free Bishops
from constantly having to evaluate anew how they are to respond to various
situations.
In the second place, the fear was expressed in discussions about the
awaited Motu Proprio, that the possibility of a wider use of the 1962
Missal would lead to disarray or even divisions within parish communities.
This fear also strikes me as quite unfounded. The use of the old Missal
presupposes a certain degree of liturgical formation and some knowledge of
the Latin language; neither of these is found very often. Already from
these concrete presuppositions, it is clearly seen that the new Missal
will certainly remain the ordinary Form of the Roman Rite, not only on
account of the juridical norms, but also because of the actual situation
of the communities of the faithful.
It is true that there have been exaggerations and at times social aspects
unduly linked to the attitude of the faithful attached to the ancient
Latin liturgical tradition. Your charity and pastoral prudence will be an
incentive and guide for improving these. For that matter, the two Forms of
the usage of the Roman Rite can be mutually enriching: new Saints and some
of the new Prefaces can and should be inserted in the old Missal. The
"Ecclesia Dei" Commission, in contact with various bodies devoted to the
usus antiquior, will study the practical possibilities in this regard. The
celebration of the Mass according to the Missal of Paul VI will be able to
demonstrate, more powerfully than has been the case hitherto, the
sacrality which attracts many people to the former usage. The most sure
guarantee that the Missal of Paul VI can unite parish communities and be
loved by them consists in its being celebrated with great reverence in
harmony with the liturgical directives. This will bring out the spiritual
richness and the theological depth of this Missal.
I now come to the positive reason which motivated my decision to issue
this Motu Proprio updating that of 1988. It is a matter of coming to an
interior reconciliation in the heart of the Church. Looking back over the
past, to the divisions which in the course of the centuries have rent the
Body of Christ, one continually has the impression that, at critical
moments when divisions were coming about, not enough was done by the
Church’s leaders to maintain or regain reconciliation and unity. One has
the impression that omissions on the part of the Church have had their
share of blame for the fact that these divisions were able to harden. This
glance at the past imposes an obligation on us today: to make every effort
to unable for all those who truly desire unity to remain in that unity or
to attain it anew. I think of a sentence in the Second Letter to the
Corinthians, where Paul writes: "Our mouth is open to you, Corinthians;
our heart is wide. You are not restricted by us, but you are restricted in
your own affections. In return … widen your hearts also!" (2 Cor 6:11-13).
Paul was certainly speaking in another context, but his exhortation can
and must touch us too, precisely on this subject. Let us generously open
our hearts and make room for everything that the faith itself allows.
There is no contradiction between the two editions of the Roman Missal. In
the history of the liturgy there is growth and progress, but no rupture.
What earlier generations held as sacred, remains sacred and great for us
too, and it cannot be all of a sudden entirely forbidden or even
considered harmful. It behooves all of us to preserve the riches which
have developed in the Church’s faith and prayer, and to give them their
proper place. Needless to say, in order to experience full communion, the
priests of the communities adhering to the former usage cannot, as a
matter of principle, exclude celebrating according to the new books. The
total exclusion of the new rite would not in fact be consistent with the
recognition of its value and holiness.
In conclusion, dear Brothers, I very much wish to stress that these new
norms do not in any way lessen your own authority and responsibility,
either for the liturgy or for the pastoral care of your faithful. Each
Bishop, in fact, is the moderator of the liturgy in his own Diocese (cf.
Sacrosanctum Concilium, 22: "Sacrae Liturgiae moderatio ab Ecclesiae
auctoritate unice pendet quae quidem est apud Apostolicam Sedem et, ad
normam iuris, apud Episcopum").
Nothing is taken away, then, from the authority of the Bishop, whose role
remains that of being watchful that all is done in peace and serenity.
Should some problem arise which the parish priest cannot resolve, the
local Ordinary will always be able to intervene, in full harmony, however,
with all that has been laid down by the new norms of the Motu Proprio.
Furthermore, I invite you, dear Brothers, to send to the Holy See an
account of your experiences, three years after this Motu Proprio has taken
effect. If truly serious difficulties come to light, ways to remedy them
can be sought.
Dear Brothers, with gratitude and trust, I entrust to your hearts as
Pastors these pages and the norms of the Motu Proprio. Let us always be
mindful of the words of the Apostle Paul addressed to the presbyters of
Ephesus: "Take heed to yourselves and to all the flock, in which the Holy
Spirit has made you overseers, to care for the Church of God which he
obtained with the blood of his own Son" (Acts 20:28).
I entrust these norms to the powerful intercession of Mary, Mother of the
Church, and I cordially impart my Apostolic Blessing to you, dear
Brothers, to the parish priests of your dioceses, and to all the priests,
your co-workers, as well as to all your faithful.
Given at Saint Peter’s, 7 July 2007
BENEDICTUS PP. XVI
posted by New Catholic at 10:02 AM
__________________
APOSTOLIC LETTER
SUMMORUM PONTIFICUM
OF THE SUPREME PONTIFF
BENEDICT XVI
GIVEN MOTU PROPRIO
__________________
[
Our predecessor John Paul II having already considered the insistent
petitions of these faithful, having listened to the views of the Cardinal
Fathers of the Consistory of 22 March 2006, having reflected deeply upon
all aspects of the question, invoked the Holy Spirit and trusting in the
help of God, with these Apostolic Letters We establish the following:
Art. 1 The Roman Missal promulgated by Paul VI is the ordinary expression
of the Lex orandi (Law of prayer) of the Catholic Church of the Latin
rite. Nonetheless, the Roman Missal promulgated by St. Pius V and reissued
by Bl. John XXIII is to be considered as an extraordinary expression of
that same Lex orandi, and must be given due honour for its venerable and
ancient usage. These two expressions of the Church’s Lex orandi will in no
any way lead to a division in the Church’s Lex credendi (Law of belief).
They are, in fact two usages of the one Roman rite.
It is, therefore, permissible to celebrate the Sacrifice of the Mass
following the typical edition of the Roman Missal promulgated by Bl. John
XXIII in 1962 and never abrogated, as an extraordinary form of the Liturgy
of the Church. The conditions for the use of this Missal as laid down by
earlier documents Quattuor abhinc annis and Ecclesia Dei, are substituted
as follows:
Art. 2 In Masses celebrated without the people, each Catholic priest of
the Latin rite, whether secular or regular, may use the Roman Missal
published by Bl. Pope John XXIII in 1962, or the Roman Missal promulgated
by Pope Paul VI in 1970, and may do so on any day with the exception of
the Easter Triduum. For such celebrations, with either one Missal or the
other, the priest has no need for permission from the Apostolic See or
from his Ordinary.
Art. 3 Communities of Institutes of consecrated life and of Societies of
apostolic life, of either pontifical or diocesan right, wishing to
celebrate Mass in accordance with the edition of the Roman Missal
promulgated in 1962, for conventual or “community” celebration in their
oratories, may do so. If an individual community or an entire Institute or
Society wishes to undertake such celebrations often, habitually or
permanently, the decision must be taken by the Superiors Major, in
accordance with the law and following their own specific decrees and
statues.
Art. 4 Celebrations of Mass as mentioned above in art. 2 may – observing
all the norms of law – also be attended by faithful who, of their own free
will, ask to be admitted.
Art. 5 § 1 In parishes, where there is a stable group of faithful who
adhere to the earlier liturgical tradition, the pastor should willingly
accept their requests to celebrate the Mass according to the rite of the
Roman Missal published in 1962, and ensure that the welfare of these
faithful harmonises with the ordinary pastoral care of the parish, under
the guidance of the bishop in accordance with canon 392, avoiding discord
and favouring the unity of the whole Church.
§ 2 Celebration in accordance with the Missal of Bl. John XXIII may take
place on working days; while on Sundays and feast days one such
celebration may also be held.
§ 3 For faithful and priests who request it, the pastor should also allow
celebrations in this extraordinary form for special circumstances such as
marriages, funerals or occasional celebrations, e.g. pilgrimages.
§ 4 Priests who use the Missal of Bl. John XXIII must be qualified to do
so and not juridically impeded.
§ 5 In churches that are not parish or conventual churches, it is the duty
of the Rector of the church to grant the above permission.
Art. 6 In Masses celebrated in the presence of the people in accordance
with the Missal of Bl. John XXIII, the readings may be given in the
vernacular, using editions recognised by the Apostolic See.
Art. 7 If a group of lay faithful, as mentioned in art. 5 § 1, has not
obtained satisfaction to their requests from the pastor, they should
inform the diocesan bishop. The bishop is strongly requested to satisfy
their wishes. If he cannot arrange for such celebration to take place, the
matter should be referred to the Pontifical Commission “Ecclesia Dei”.
Art. 8 A bishop who, desirous of satisfying such requests, but who for
various reasons is unable to do so, may refer the problem to the
Commission “Ecclesia Dei” to obtain counsel and assistance.
Art. 9 § 1 The pastor, having attentively examined all aspects, may also
grant permission to use the earlier ritual for the administration of the
Sacraments of Baptism, Marriage, Penance, and the Anointing of the Sick,
if the good of souls would seem to require it.
§ 2 Ordinaries are given the right to celebrate the Sacrament of
Confirmation using the earlier Roman Pontifical, if the good of souls
would seem to require it.
§ 2 Clerics ordained “in sacris constitutis” may use the Roman Breviary
promulgated by Bl. John XXIII in 1962.
Art. 10 The ordinary of a particular place, if he feels it appropriate,
may erect a personal parish in accordance with can. 518 for celebrations
following the ancient form of the Roman rite, or appoint a chaplain, while
observing all the norms of law.
Art. 11 The Pontifical Commission “Ecclesia Dei”, erected by John Paul II
in 1988, continues to exercise its function. Said Commission will have the
form, duties and norms that the Roman Pontiff wishes to assign it.
Art. 12 This Commission, apart from the powers it enjoys, will exercise
the authority of the Holy See, supervising the observance and application
of these dispositions.
We order that everything We have established with these Apostolic Letters
issued as Motu Proprio be considered as “established and decreed”, and to
be observed from 14 September of this year, Feast of the Exaltation of the
Cross, whatever there may be to the contrary.
From Rome, at St. Peter’s, 7 July 2007, third year of Our Pontificate.
-
IT'S BACK! THIS IS A GREAT DAY FOR THE CATHOLIC CHURCH!
-
....
Someone condense that into something easier to read...
-
....
Someone condense that into something easier to read...
Catholic priests can say mass in the classic Latin language.
-
Tradition
-
But are they still allowed to say it in English or whatever language they use??
-
Saying it in Latin seems kinda pointless...
I mean, if you were to go to be a missionary in Africa, would you preach in English or a language they actually understand...?
-
The Catholics have always been a bit against the actual parishioners reading the Bible itself. My father is Catholic and knows nothing about his religion except what the priest has to say. When I went to a Catholic high school, and had to take religion class, I was the teacher's favourite because I actually knew something about the Christian religion. But then... I'm not Catholic.
I do believe at one point in the Catholic history, only priests were allowed to read the Holy Bible? I could be totally wrong, as I haven't taken any religious studies in over three years...
-
Excuse the pictures but this is my initial reaction when I saw this topic...
(http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b356/ssj4gogita4/2apekjrealjse.gif)
(http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b356/ssj4gogita4/136359506-M.jpg)
-
http://www.courant.com/news/nationworld/hc-pope0711.artjul11,0,3692094.story (http://www.courant.com/news/nationworld/hc-pope0711.artjul11,0,3692094.story)
Nice...
-
http://www.courant.com/news/nationworld/hc-pope0711.artjul11,0,3692094.story (http://www.courant.com/news/nationworld/hc-pope0711.artjul11,0,3692094.story)
Nice...
That left a bad taste in my mouth...
-
The Mass was in latin for 2000 years and now they are going back to it. The Novice Ordo is dangerous for your soul not because it is in the vernacular so much as the crap that goes on:
Clown Masses
Communion on the hand
Women on the alter and giving out communion(only the blessed hands of a priest may touch communion. They gave special permission for the lay to give out communion only on special occasions. This is due to the priest shortage. Women could not. But the American bishops ignored the Vatican and did it anyway. Just like alter girls.
-
I do believe at one point in the Catholic history, only priests were allowed to read the Holy Bible? I could be totally wrong, as I haven't taken any religious studies in over three years...
ye
Anyways, what's a good reason to have priests not say it in Latin if they wanted to?
-
The Mass was in latin for 2000 years and now they are going back to it. The Novice Ordo is dangerous for your soul not because it is in the vernacular so much as the crap that goes on:
Clown Masses
Communion on the hand
Women on the alter and giving out communion(only the blessed hands of a priest may touch communion. They gave special permission for the lay to give out communion only on special occasions. This is due to the priest shortage. Women could not. But the American bishops ignored the Vatican and did it anyway. Just like alter girls.
Clown masses and communion on the hand is the only crap that goes on in the Catholic church?
-
The Mass was in latin for 2000 years and now they are going back to it. The Novice Ordo is dangerous for your soul not because it is in the vernacular so much as the crap that goes on:
Clown Masses
Communion on the hand
Women on the alter and giving out communion(only the blessed hands of a priest may touch communion. They gave special permission for the lay to give out communion only on special occasions. This is due to the priest shortage. Women could not. But the American bishops ignored the Vatican and did it anyway. Just like alter girls.
Clown masses and communion on the hand is the only crap that goes on in the Catholic church?
well...that and what the priests that are gay do...
-
http://www.courant.com/news/nationworld/hc-pope0711.artjul11,0,3692094.story (http://www.courant.com/news/nationworld/hc-pope0711.artjul11,0,3692094.story)
Nice...
Lol wow...I'm wondering what his goal was in "declaring" that, aside from pissing off prostestants that actually care about what he says.
-
Let the idolatry begin!!!
-
http://www.courant.com/news/nationworld/hc-pope0711.artjul11,0,3692094.story (http://www.courant.com/news/nationworld/hc-pope0711.artjul11,0,3692094.story)
Nice...
Lol wow...I'm wondering what his goal was in "declaring" that, aside from pissing off prostestants that actually care about what he says.
Why don't they just have their Pope issue a statement? Oh wait. </Colbert>
-
Catholicism was the only Church founded by Jesus Christ! The Pope is the descendant of St. Peter, the first Pope! He is Peter, and I stand by him! Of course we have always believed that the Catholic Church is one one true religion! Why would anyone belong to it if we did not believe this?!!
-
Lol. There is no sole church of Christ. A church is a church of Christ if it honestly teaches the Word of God and shows what being a Christian truly means. This is not limited to any denomination or lack thereof. And true Christianity isn't about "religion" or religious practices...It's about a personal relationship with Christ, striving always to be more like Him, and spreading the Word.
There's my two cents.
-
So are Christians only doing good things, not because they are good things to do, but because they are just trying to get more points on their jesus card?
-
Lol...
There is no "points". No amount of good works can get you into heaven...can ever overwrite our wicked nature. We are saved by grace and grace alone. Christians do good things because they're the right things to do and through good deeds and selfless acts, it allows you to put yourself aside and draw closer to God.
-
Well then it's not trully selfless then. If it's done to ultimately get closer to god.
-
How so? A Christian gives all praise and glory to God. We live for Him and through Him. We get close to God, meaning that we seek to have the best relationship with Him as possible, because our lives will be as shining beacons for Him because of his infinite love for us. There is no selfishness in this...What we strive to do in this life is for God and God alone. Ultimate humility is a Christian's goal.
-
unlike the protestant belief that you are saved by faith alone, Catholics believe that you are saved by faith and good works equal. Faith without works is dead.
-
How so? A Christian gives all praise and glory to God. We live for Him and through Him. We get close to God, meaning that we seek to have the best relationship with Him as possible, because our lives will be as shining beacons for Him because of his infinite love for us. There is no selfishness in this...What we strive to do in this life is for God and God alone. Ultimate humility is a Christian's goal.
Yes, but some people may think doing certain things will get points on their Jesus card, and that is why they do it. My stepfather for instance:
I beat my children, buuuuuuuut I go to Church every sunday.
I helped lots of people in the hurricane aftermath,
Buuuuuuuut I called my stepdaughter a fatass and told her noone wants her and she is going up for adoption!
^_^
Lovley man, points on the Jesus card, most definetly.
-
Latin masses?
I'd prefer English ones, so I can understand what the priest has to say...
-
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6874482611768050603&q=what+we+have+lost&total=5607&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=0
^If all Catholics would just watch that video, they'd agree with me.
-
I was raised Catholic, but I'm more, and more doubtful about my church. It's too impersonal for my tastes. I believe in God and Jesus, and I believe that a Christians ultimate goal in life is to reach heaven. That good Christians don't practice hate one anyone, even if they disagree with them, or what they believe. Christians who practice hate, are not good Christians, and will go to hell.
-
yehh....love is all you need. thats what you just said Rocky. THAT'S BLASPHEMY!!! CANT YOU WATCH THE VIDEO I PUT UP?!!!! ATLEAST WATCH SOME OF IT!!!!
-
Lol...You havent changed at all.
-
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6874482611768050603&q=what+we+have+lost&total=5607&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=
^^^^CAN'T ANY OF YOU JUST WATCH THE VIDEO!!! IT DOES A GREAT JOB OF DEFENDING MY POINT!!!!! ATLEAST WATCH SOME OF IT!!!!
-
I'm not even catholic...And there's only a couple catholics on this whole board.
-
I KNOW THERE'S MORE THAN THAT!!!!!!
-
Lol ok, list the many catholics here. I know of only a small handfull.
-
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6874482611768050603&q=what+we+have+lost&total=5607&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=
^^^^CAN'T ANY OF YOU JUST WATCH THE VIDEO!!! IT DOES A GREAT JOB OF DEFENDING MY POINT!!!!! ATLEAST WATCH SOME OF IT!!!!
Most of it's ridiculous, but it's not like it goes on everywhere.
Having a church full of people who supposedly believe the exact same thing as the person right next to them... that's ridiculous.
-
I went up to 11:25 of your video and I feel like I need to say something.
It seems to me that catholics are very much like the wizards from disc world, they can do magic very simply and easily but they have to dress it up, add unnecessary candles, a few pentagrams on the floor, some clothes, a few useless chants before the actual incantation before they are happy to actually do the simple magic.
The video claims that catholics are sad because the cross is the wrong shape, there aren't meaningful stained glass windows or the alter is made of the wrong substance. Basically because the church isn't pretty enough.
Doesn't that seem a little materialistic.
-
I go to church in a school gym. :P
And as the saying goes..."Churches are not museums for saints; they are hospitals for sinners."
-
I hate the Novice Ordo Mass of Pope Paul VI! I want the Tridentine Mass of Pope St. Pius V back!!!!!
-
I hate the Novice Ordo Mass of Pope Paul VI! I want the Tridentine Mass of Pope St. Pius V back!!!!!
Oh please! The Tridentine Mass of Pope St. Pius V makes the Agnus Patrum Dei Mass of Pope Stephen VII look like the Sacrum Fili Mass of Pope Clement XIII!
-
I hate the Novice Ordo Mass of Pope Paul VI! I want the Tridentine Mass of Pope St. Pius V back!!!!!
Oh please! The Tridentine Mass of Pope St. Pius V makes the Agnus Patrum Dei Mass of Pope Stephen VII look like the Sacrum Fili Mass of Pope Clement XIII!
...
*Twitch*
-
I hate the Novice Ordo Mass of Pope Paul VI! I want the Tridentine Mass of Pope St. Pius V back!!!!!
Oh please! The Tridentine Mass of Pope St. Pius V makes the Agnus Patrum Dei Mass of Pope Stephen VII look like the Sacrum Fili Mass of Pope Clement XIII!
...
*Twitch*
Yes?
-
THERE'S NO SUCH THING AS THOSE "MASSES" YOU MENTIONED
-
I hate the Novice Ordo Mass of Pope Paul VI! I want the Tridentine Mass of Pope St. Pius V back!!!!!
Oh please! The Tridentine Mass of Pope St. Pius V makes the Agnus Patrum Dei Mass of Pope Stephen VII look like the Sacrum Fili Mass of Pope Clement XIII!
...
*Twitch*
Yes?
That just made my brain go dead...
-
THERE'S NO SUCH THING AS THOSE "MASSES" YOU MENTIONED
Obviously you haven't done your homework!
-
Catholicism is thinly veiled Paganism. Lol :rolleyes:
-
Pagans have many gods, catholics have just the one.
-
Pagans have many gods, catholics have just the one.
Yes, but Catholicism is so theatrical, and seems very Paganistic in that sense.
-
Evolution is a pagan religion. There is no scientific evidence for it whatsoever.
-
Evolution is a pagan religion. There is no scientific evidence for it whatsoever.
no scientific evidence for evolution?
man, get out from under your rock.
-
Evolution is a pagan religion. There is no scientific evidence for it whatsoever.
Have you ever heard of the work of Darwin?
-
Evolution is a pagan religion. There is no scientific evidence for it whatsoever.
That's what I've been trying to say! Dinosaur bones were placed in the ground so the all-knowing God could figure out whether we believe in him!
-
Evolution is a pagan religion. There is no scientific evidence for it whatsoever.
Have you ever heard of the work of Darwin?
Lol...If you're going to try and stand for evolution, don't use the man who denounced his own theory as your example.
-
Evolution is a pagan religion. There is no scientific evidence for it whatsoever.
Have you ever heard of the work of Darwin?
Lol...If you're going to try and stand for evolution, don't use the man who denounced his own theory as your example.
Did he now?
And why wouldn't he use Darwin as an example for evolution, even if he did supposedly denounce his own theories? That's like leaving J. Robert Oppenheimer out of a report about the atomic bomb, just because he later called for the proliferation of nuclear weapons.
Evolution is a pagan religion. There is no scientific evidence for it whatsoever.
I suppose Christianity is a pagan religion also. There is no proof God exists.
-
Evolution is a pagan religion. There is no scientific evidence for it whatsoever.
Have you ever heard of the work of Darwin?
Lol...If you're going to try and stand for evolution, don't use the man who denounced his own theory as your example.
myth.
-
Better call teh mythbusterz :P
-
Ok then, let's try this another way, tell us all the proof you have that evolution CAN'T be the answer.