Men Must Embrace their Chosen Life

18 Responses

  1. P.R.Margeot says:

    Excellent. Thank you to the Cardinal.

    One comment: the picture shows a bride immodestly dressed,as, alas, many, many brides are in the Catholic Church. She should have been properly covered and would have been even more beautiful on her big day.

    I appeal to all future young brides : be modestly dressed on your wedding day, do not forget that an immodestly dressed woman can create undesirable if not forbidden thoughts and desires in men. What a responsibility you have.

    The same applies to the guests at the church first, then at the reception.

    What is needed is for the pastors to keep reminding their flocks about this requirement, duty. They must have courage, guts to face criticism. One sees the effect , result of Modernism today.
    A modernist would say : you must be broad-minded, live with you times, after all, surely G-d Himself does not mind, He understands, He is ALL for love between the future spouses, He is not interested in details.

    Blessed are the pure at heart…they will see G-d.

  2. Mike de Fleuriot says:

    Firstly, Jesus was a Jew, and not a Catholic, by any means, secondly it is well known that the town of Nazareth did not exist during the period in question. But aside from that, Jesus as a perfect model for man to man relationships, are moot when you consider the infinite punishment promised for finite crimes. That fact that a supposedly morally perfect being could allow a place like hell to continue, suggests strongly that this being is in fact not morally good at all, let alone perfectly so.
    Invoking the Genesis story, which all rational people know to be a fiction, is dishonest and misleading at best. Who created evil, who allowed it to continue, who had the power and knowledge to stop it, before it affected humankind. (Isaiah 45:7) The only possible answer to these questions, is the weak wristed “Mysterious Ways”.

    So why should anyone follow or listen to the words of such a being, when there are better examples of morality right here in the human world. For example, a fairly new famous quote from Tracie Harris. If I could stop a person from raping a child, I would. Thats the difference between me and your God.
    “Let it be done to me according to your word”? Why would anyone think that this is a good thing to do, especially when you examine the alleged past record of this being. You are saying that anything that happens to you, is the will of this being, even if it leaves you beaten and bleeding in a back alley.

    Well as we do know so called Christian marriage can be traced by to the suggestion of Bishop Ignatius of Antioch, who suggested that people who marry should gain the approval of their local bishop, and this was around 110 CE, so long after Jesus was alive, but during the time the gospels where being complied. From this one is led to understand that it was the writers of the gospels views on marriage and not the views of Jesus. (Do we need to go into an explanation about the authors of the gospels?)
    Remember again, Jesus was a Jew and knew NOTHING about the Catholic Church, and repeating this lie, to make it accepted in the ears of the weak minded, is the sign of a theist.

    A better way to phrase this, one well known to rational humans, is to do to others as you would want them to do to you. And to do this, because it is the right and proper thing to do, doing it without fear or favour. This is what it means to be a good human, doing the right thing, because it is the right thing to do, and not because of some promise of 72 virgins or eternal chanting to a god.

  3. Chris says:

    If men are supposed to be like Jesus then they should neither marry nor have children and die fighting corrupt theocracies.

  4. P.R.Margeot says:

    Mike de Fleuriot, you do not belong to this site, I appeal to the Editor to intervene and I would fail in my duty if I did not write what I wrote.

  5. Mike de Fleuriot says:

    Censorship, is this the Catholic way, I think not.

  6. P.R.Margeot says:

    Besides being an atheist, you are also a liberal. And you assume that you can say/write anything anywhere. You know human rights. There is news for you.

    About your participation on Muslim and Jewish sites re atheism. First question to you : Do you go there to propose your message of nihilism and hopelessness? If yes, how do you fare there? You imagine my fascination with your treatment on those sites. Hmm, unless you are scared to challenge them.
    Second question : how are you received? Are you sort of allowed to pour your venom, your arrogant ideas, your rejection of G-d , His Laws, His teachings, His commandments, your arrogance to believe that ” Am all right Jack, am liberated”. And your immortal soul, Mike de Fleuriot?

    Will you tell us , Mike de Fleuriot?

    Or are you scared to death to challenge those of other religions ? Or are you coming here because you sense weakness ? Let me tell you something: take full advantage now, your future is bleak.

    As you know, you have here two commenters very favourable to you, in the sense that they love to debate and put the best of their high intellect to debate with people like you. So wait for them to start the debate and we will read with expectation.

    I have seen through you, Mike de Fleuriot, and am not inclined to write to you. I will carry on doing what I have been doing for many months now : pray for your salvation and re-conversion and your return to the Holy Church before you die. Confidentially, if you want to meet a good priest, let me know: that will be between you and the priest and nobody will know about it.

    Finally, courage.

    Remember, in the mid-fifties, the words you heard many a times(like me, as we are of the same age) : INTROIBO AD ALTARE DEI. Analyze those words, they encompass everything. or many things , vital things.

  7. John E Cunha says:

    I believe that the church of Satan teaches the rule that “Treating others as they treat you will form meaningful and productive bonds”. As such Mike’s comment stating that “to do to others as you would want them to do to you” is in fact a satanic teaching. (By the way, reading certain satanic websites they state that they are in fact atheists, some don’t even believe in the devil).

    @ the Editor: On the Southern Cross website one is able to find the following:

    1. Pro-gay activists.
    2. Pro-abortionists.
    3. Pro-female ordination “ists”.
    4. Atheists.
    5. Satanists.
    6. Heretics.

    Why on Earth does the newspaper allow these comments to be published? Why are they not censored? And if there are persons who continue to post anti-Catholic posts, why are thet not blocked? Most Catholic websites have these rules in place, rules to maintain peace and order and protect the faithful who happen to read these posts.

    If an atheist, or one of the 6 options (some more debatable than others), wish to voice their opinions they are more than welcome to create their own blog or website and a search engine will do the rest. Why is the Souhern Cross not protecting its website, its readers?

    There are dangers in promoting this liberty. There are youth with access to internet these days that can come accross these posts. As such there is a responsibility for the Southern Cross to protect and moderate these comments.

  8. Mike de Fleuriot says:

    Think about what you are wanting to create, John. A forum devoid of opposing opinions, one where only one voice is hear and held to be true. A place where members will not be able to judge for themselves the merits of the opinions of others. In other words, you and PR want to return to the dark ages, when the Church ruled over men, and controlled their every waking thought. But that is not going to happen, now that people realise that they can question everything that is presented to them.

    No matter how much you want to bind humankind’s mind, you will fail, in a small part because of atheists like me, who oppose censors like yourself. By attempting to censor me, you are showing that your position and belief is weak and needs protection, in fact this is exactly what you have said.

    Come into the light, and examine what we are saying, take our words and show why our meaning is incorrect or invalid. Do this well enough and you might change our minds.

    Dare you do this? Can you do this? Are you able to do this?

  9. John E Cunha says:

    I like to think of it in this way Mike: Certain websites are devoted to certain things. Like for example a website that focuses & teaches about a certain make of car. Now the objective of the website is to promote that brand of car. Then here comes along a commentor that says that this website, all these cars are rubbish that what they say about the car is false. He’s ridden this car & believes that everybody must believe it to be rubbish as well. He thus achieves in creating frustration and doubt.

    I know that this is a terrible analogy but my point is that this is a Catholic website. Hence Catholic teachings should be upheld.

    I have nothing against debates. Debating about the faith with people with other faiths or those with none, can be a good thing. A good thing provided it’s conducted in a respectful environment. But this is not that platform, or at least it’s never been advertised as one.

    As to my beliefs sir I can assure you that my belief in God & the Holy Catholic Church will never falter. I’ve had doubts on my faith journey, lost relationships with atheist friends, but through it all I have come out all the more stronger & confident in my faith.

    @ The Editor: In addition to my above post, could you perhaps state what the point of this website is? Is it to publically debate these matters? Or is it to promote the Catholic faith? I believe the newspaper itself aims to promote the faith. Is the website not?

  10. Mike de Fleuriot says:

    And if this person can show to you that the car on offer is inferior, surely that is a good thing. I guess this is where the poison that faith is, comes into play. You believe and refuse to examine anything that you know will change you mind, the soul of the narrow minded. You speak of losing friends and still coming out from that as a stronger human, how is this possible, did your friends have nothing to offer you, that you could discount their views so easily or was it that you had to get rid of them to keep your faith whole?

    One thing I have notice, especially on this forum, those who wish to censor, refuse to engage in the discussion that causes them to need to censor. This is fear, if your faith is so strong, as you claim, then you will be willing to enter into debate and deal with the points we make to you. Not to do so, is to show what we know already, that your faith is weak and needs police and authority to protect it from cracking and falling to the ground.

    Imagine if you will, being able to engage and show where and why positions that I hold to be invalid, that I think would offer more to your position, than the weak tactics of censorship and denial. Can you do this? Dare you do this?

  11. P.R.Margeot says:

    I have already told commenter de Fleuriot that his conscience is ALREADY the best sign of the existence of G-d. How goes he know when he does wrong ? How does he know when he does good ? Apart from humans, what other creatures have this faculty? Did he think about his CONSCIENCE at all ? He must have.

    He speaks of ‘opposition’, ‘robust’ discussions, theses and antitheses, syntheses, all the vocabulary of a modernist , but of course he is beyond modernism and liberalism. He is ‘liberated’…. Or so he thinks. Ah, if only he could be touched by G-d’s Grace foday and see clearly what he is missing. I invite him to join me one day , when he is ready, to visit a church, a simple one, a poor one, and he will observe a few things, he will see what humility is(in seeeing the simple faithful for 90 minutes or so). And when Mike de Fleuriot dies, who will remember him ? Who will pray for him? He who REJECTED our Saviour and actively fought against His establishment, the Holy Church(which still has warts and all), but which is coming right slowly through mainly the M.O.A.T. The M.O.A.T. the mass of Mike de Fleuriot’s first Holy Communion, at least. The mass of his parents, his uncle or brother’s ordination in the 50’s, his grand-parents and many more generations. Now today, he declares that he is liberated from superstitious middle ages practices. he is Free, he is a liberal, free from constraint, from Authority, he decides what to do on Earth, he knows better, and worse, he wants to instill his poison to all weaker Catholics and non-Catholics. THAT’s my problem with him.

    He will be engaged soon by two commenters from here, that’s for sure. We will read them and be illuminated.

    Have a good day.

    Dominus Tecum

  12. Gunther S says:

    “secondly it is well known that the town of Nazareth did not exist during the period in question”

    Ignorant nonsense, as archaeology has defintively proven. You ought to know stuff before commenting on it.

    John, if any Catholic takes counsel in matters of faith from a comments section, then that Catholic has weak faith. The comments are open to all visitors to the website. The only alternative is to close the comments section down. And if The Southern Cross decides to do so, it will not because an atheist is soundimng off his half-baked ideas, but because Catholics are failing in their duty to conform with the 11th Commandment.

  13. John E Cunha says:

    Thank you Gnther S for your response. However this is exactly my problem, concern for Catholic’s with weak or developing faith. I personally, about 2 to 3 years ago, became influenced by the comments published by one of the frequent commenters. I also know of others who also read those comments and were too adversely affected.

    Is this therefore not proof enough that comments should be looked at more vigorously?

    “Kindness can kill if love is not willing to hurt”.

  14. Mike de Fleuriot says:

    It amazes one, well not really, how theists never answer the charges put to them. In my initial comment, I pointed out the misdirection that the cardinal makes by claiming Jesus for his own. The fact that Jesus was not a catholic in any way or form. As well as showing that using the fictional story of Genesis as if it really happen is dishonest to say the least. No one has been willing to openly acknowledge the immorality of this story, the blatant entrapment of these “first” humans, though the use of the omniscience this god is alleged to have had. The story is supposed to provide a reason for the murder of a son for events that the son as the father planned for in the first place.

    We all know the logical problems of these things, but to allow it to be used a morally good example, surely is not something weak minded Catholics, which you claim to care for, need to be exposed to. The only thing I get from these debates, is how poor your arguments are, when they consist of attack me as person, and rarely address the points I make.

    The article from the cardinal is a poor one, that would and does appeal to the previously mentioned weak minded Catholics that John, Gunter and PR care so deeply about. Any other person reading it will dismiss it as weak and content free.

  15. John E Cunha says:

    No matter how good food is, if poison is mixed with it, it may cause the death of him who eats it. So it is with conversation. A single bad word, an evil action, an unbecoming joke, is often enough to harm one or more young listeners, and may later cause them to lose God’s grace.

    — St John Bosco

  16. P.R.Margeot says:

    I have to agree 100% with the St John Bosco argument above. Same with Truth: a drop of poison makes it suspect to say the least.

  17. Mike de Fleuriot says:

    Of course, you do realise this is exactly what you are doing as well. At least with my poison, it will make the person stronger, when they examine it and learn from it. What you folk want, is more sheep for your flock, you want unquestioning obedience to commands give by yourselves.

    Take what I have said, examine it, and show to all why my position is invalid, and the longer you fail to do that, the more certain it seems that my position is in fact the correct one. Attempting to censor only adds to this certainty that my position is correct or even that it might be correct. Only when you have totally removed people like me from the discussion and the memory of people, can you be sure that your poison will be the only one that people will accept.

    But as you realise, this will never happen again, people have learnt that they have the right to question all and any authority, including Popes and Gods. That makes you scared, I know but I do not care.

  18. P.R.Margeot says:

    Mike de Fleuriot, your arrogance goes crescendo, To believe that you hold the Truth….Mike de Fleuriot of the Southern Hemisphere…
    I recommend that you try the Muslim and Jewish sites now that you may not be able to carry on poisoning the Catholic atmosphere. You’ve never answered my question : are you afraid to venture there ? Tell us and then go in peace, if you can obtain peace. If you do not tell us, that would be ….
    Finally to think that you have a following here : what presumption. You are nothing, you represent yourself, apart from two commenters here who debated with you following my strong suggestion that you be ignored, well, there you are.
    What can I tell you more ? Carry on reading the S.C. , you may find something worthwhile, it is or should most certainly be THE mouthpiece of the Holy Church. I will pray for you every night, that is a promise, an solemn engagement on my part. I have not asked for a good mass to be said for you, yet. It will come.
    St Michael, pray and keep safe our brother in Jesus Christ. He needs to save his soul, we sinners have the grave duty to pray for him and for each other.