Theology III

[Earniel]

Third thread, and the debate can continue.

The topic,as before, is religion.

Original thread starter was Ruinel.

The previous threads were Real debate thread for religion and Theological opinions, part II. Both have reached the 1000-post limit, and are now closed.

PS: If anyone wonders why I named this thread 'theology' instead of the 'theological opinions', I have had a request for a name change, and I think the new title is indeed better suited. If you do not agree, feel free to PM me.

Have fun.

[Count Comfect]

Despite an excellent attempt by Lief, Rian still has the most posts in the three versions of this thread, somewhere north of 300...

I kinda liked the "opinions" in the title - it reminded me (at least) that what we're debating/arguing are our opinions, and not something to get highly offended about. But I guess "-logy" means "study of," so still no hard feelings...

[Rían]

*is soaking her sore little fingers in a soothing finger-bath*

[hectorberlioz]

Oh sheesh, my music teacher is hugey anti-Catholic/Early Church.

Apparently:

Only monks were allowed to learn to read.

Gregory the Great didn't let anyone else write a liturgy format. (So Basil and Chrysostom were in competition?)

Germans couldn't understand Latin, because they didn't live in Rome.

It's weird that mediavals used actual numbers in desiging their church buildings rather than just making a simple corn cob hut.

Oh yeah, and of course the world was considered flat (true!), and that this makes them all bigots.

And the "bone church" in Prague is creepy and evil, because they have bones there.

[sun-star]

Originally Posted by hectorberlioz

Only monks were allowed to learn to read.

Oh haven't you heard? That's still Church policy

[hectorberlioz]

Originally Posted by sun-star

Oh haven't you heard? That's still Church policy

Of course. Pope Benedict owns over 200,000 books. Those are all the ones he confiscated.

[Gwaimir Windgem]

Originally Posted by hectorberlioz

Oh sheesh, my music teacher is hugey anti-Catholic/Early Church.

I hate it when people are hugey anything.

Germans couldn't understand Latin, because they didn't live in Rome.

Wait...I don't live in Rome! Well, sh**, I guess that means I don't understand Latin! What have they been teaching me here for the last two years? What did I write my last paper in?

Oh yeah, and of course the world was considered flat (true!), and that this makes them all bigots.

Gods, people...the world was generally believed, at least in intellectual circles, to be spherical from a very early time. Get yer facts straight already!

[hectorberlioz]

Originally Posted by Gwaimir Windgem

I hate it when people are hugey anything.

Yeah, like hookah smokers...*gulp* ( )

Wait...I don't live in Rome! Well, sh**, I guess that means I don't understand Latin! What have they been teaching me here for the last two years? What did I write my last paper in?

Silly Gwai, tricks are for kids.

Gods, people...the world was generally believed, at least in intellectual circles, to be spherical from a very early time. Get yer facts straight already!

So can you fly over here for my next music class? Please

[elven dragonrider]

Originally Posted by hectorberlioz

Oh sheesh, my music teacher is hugey anti-Catholic/Early Church.

Apparently:
Only monks were allowed to read.
It's weird that mediavals used actual numbers in desiging their church buildings rather than just making a simple corn cob hut.

And the "bone church" in Prague is creepy and evil, because they have bones there.

THis is a sad world. It is to bad some people have to make it that way. I haven't seen this thread before, so I was reading the first page. Monks were the onlyones allowed to read so the catholics would have complete control over their people. Like the slaves in America.

[sun-star]

Originally Posted by elven dragonrider

THis is a sad world. It is to bad some people have to make it that way. I haven't seen this thread before, so I was reading the first page. Monks were the onlyones allowed to read so the catholics would have complete control over their people. Like the slaves in America.

Many, many people in the Middle Ages were able to read apart from monks. In fact, monastries were usually great centres of learning and often the only providers of education for lay-people. The idea that no one was "allowed" to read except the clergy is a complete myth

[Lief Erikson]

Originally Posted by Count Comfect

Despite an excellent attempt by Lief, Rian still has the most posts in the three versions of this thread, somewhere north of 300...

Darn . . .

Originally Posted by Count Comfect

I kinda liked the "opinions" in the title - it reminded me (at least) that what we're debating/arguing are our opinions, and not something to get highly offended about. But I guess "-logy" means "study of," so still no hard feelings...

Myself, I prefer the new name. Because I don't think it's all just opinions, any more than science is just a bunch of opinions. They're opinions based upon evidence in both cases, so the new name makes more sense to me. The previous seems to take it as an assumption that all the theological positions I've been arguing for throughout all my time on Entmoot are wrong .


By the way, how did you find out, Count Comfect, how many posts each person has submitted in this thread? I bet it has something to do with the Find, but I've never understood very well how that works.

[Rían]

Originally Posted by Lief Erikson

By the way, how did you find out, Count Comfect, how many posts each person has submitted in this thread? I bet it has something to do with the Find, but I've never understood very well how that works.

He just has a lot of time on his hands ...


(at the forum level, click on the number in the "replies" column for the thread you want to know about)

[Nurvingiel]

I agree with Lief completely. Theology isn't a bunch of opinions, and saying so diminishes the scope of discussion. When you talk about theology, you're going to state your opinions, but you're also going to explain your beliefs, and cite facts.

I think this will be an interesting debate.

So I'll throw a question out there, unless someone wants to restart the discussion from the end of the last thread.

Now, I'm not picking on the Catholic Church, but I am curious as to why nuns can't practice Mass.

One possible question of many to discuss.

[brownjenkins]

Originally Posted by Nurvingiel

When you talk about theology, you're going to state your opinions, but you're also going to explain your beliefs, and cite facts.

Of course, all "facts" are colored by opinions, especially where theology is concerned.

[Nurvingiel]

Not necessarily. "Christians believe that Jesus is the Son of God" is a fact about the religion.

But you're right, some times opinions are presented as facts.

[Count Comfect]

Originally Posted by Nurvingiel

Now, I'm not picking on the Catholic Church, but I am curious as to why nuns can't practice Mass.

Because practice makes perfect, and mankind is inherently imperfect...

[sisterandcousinandaunt]

Originally Posted by Count Comfect

Because practice makes perfect, and mankind is inherently imperfect...

I was fishing around near "they're busy practicing Gravity", "they're too grave", but I couldn't quite get there.

[Gwaimir Windgem]

Originally Posted by Nurvingiel

Now, I'm not picking on the Catholic Church, but I am curious as to why nuns can't practice Mass.

Because nuns have not been ordained, for the same reasons that monks cannot say the Mass, unless they are also priests. Traditional Christian (not just Catholic) theology states that Christ instituted the sacrament/sacramental of Holy Orders, in order to allow the Last Supper to continue to be celebrated through the ages; not just any one can celebrate the sacrament, but only an ordained minister, according to Eastern Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox, Nestorian, and Catholic doctrine, not to mention many Lutherans and the Anglican Communion. Nuns and monks live a consecrated life, but they are consecrated for this purpose; rather, their consecration is ordered towards the end of a communal life of poverty, prayer, and obedience.

BTW, nuns are not peculiar to the Catholic Church. The Orthodox have them as well, as do the Anglicans and some Lutherans; I understand that there is also a Presbyterian monastic community out there somewhere. Basically, any community which has any deep sense of continuity with the Christian church of ages past will have monastics.

[Nurvingiel]

Welcome to the Moot Tuinor! It's awesome to welcome another person to the discussion. You'll find that adding a lot of paragraph breaks to your posts will make them easier to read: see, for example, Lief Erikson and Brownjenkins's excellent posts.

Originally Posted by Gwaimir Windgem

Because nuns have not been ordained, for the same reasons that monks cannot say the Mass, unless they are also priests. Traditional Christian (not just Catholic) theology states that Christ instituted the sacrament/sacramental of Holy Orders, in order to allow the Last Supper to continue to be celebrated through the ages; not just any one can celebrate the sacrament, but only an ordained minister, according to Eastern Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox, Nestorian, and Catholic doctrine, not to mention many Lutherans and the Anglican Communion. Nuns and monks live a consecrated life, but they are consecrated for this purpose; rather, their consecration is ordered towards the end of a communal life of poverty, prayer, and obedience.

BTW, nuns are not peculiar to the Catholic Church. The Orthodox have them as well, as do the Anglicans and some Lutherans; I understand that there is also a Presbyterian monastic community out there somewhere. Basically, any community which has any deep sense of continuity with the Christian church of ages past will have monastics.

Cool. I didn't realise that there were Anglican nuns. (And I'm Anglican! )

Anyway, I was specifically asking about why Catholic nuns can't become ordained so that they may practice a Catholic mass. My mom went to Catholic school as a kid and had some very fine teachers who were nuns, one of whom she keeps in touch with to this day. But why are these wonderful women not allowed to be ordained?

Because if they were allowed, I'm sure some nuns would persue this, and we would see them practicing Mass.

Originally Posted by Gwaimir Windgem

That's kind of inverted; you're saying 'Not all Christians believe Jesus was the Son of God; some sects don't even believe that he was divine', which implies that the latter idea is more rare. However, a number of people believe Jesus was the Son of God without believing that he was divine. Belief in his divinity is superadded to believe in him as son of God. But anyway, the general consensus is that the word 'Christian' applies to those who consider him to have been the son of God, at the very least. Any attempt to say otherwise is nothing other than an attempt to subvert words to a different meaning than that which is usually given them, which is an assault on language, the basis of human communication.

I agree with you Gwai. We Christians aren't anal, but there are a few things you have to believe in order to be a Christian. Believing that Jesus is the Son of God is one of those things. We don't say how you have to believe this, and belief can take many forms, but in some way you do have to believe this.

I like how there's two discussions going on at once in here. I hope we don't tread on each other.

[brownjenkins]

Originally Posted by Lief Erikson

The previous seems to take it as an assumption that all the theological positions I've been arguing for throughout all my time on Entmoot are wrong .

Speaking of which, this new thread doesn't get you off the hook for answering all my points in the last one.